FOCUS April 2020

1 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

FOCUS April 2020 Vol. 8 No: 2

In the Beginning God Created, Prof. Dr. John P. Abraham, South Texas – Page 16 Cover Photo: Who Do You Say I Am?

A Publication of Diaspora FOCUS

Who was Jesus? And who is Jesus for us today? Dr. Zac Varghese, London – Page 21 Editorial, The Identity of Jesus, as the Messiah (Christ) - Page 3

Who was Jesus? Lal Varghese, Esq., Dallas Are you the One Who is to Come? Or Are We to Wait for Another? Mrs. Denis Mordell, London – Page 5

Are You the Messiah? Mr. David Brand, London – Page 7

– Page 23

Christianity and the Ascetic Ideal, Revd Dr. Valson Thampu, Trivandrum - Page 27

Maranatha or Manna?

Seeking the True Jesus, Mr. V. Georgekutty, Karunagappally, Kerala – Page 10

“I am” Sayings, Revd Dr. Abraham Philip, Kottayam, – Page 14

Chhotebhai, Kanpur, India - Page 30

The Holy Books - Part 5, Dr. Ian Fry, Honorary Postdoctoral Associate, University of Divinity, Melbourne – Page 33

2 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

EDITORIAL The Identity of Jesus, as the Messiah (Christ) After Jesus’ baptism–Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother who was a disciple of John the Baptist overheard John’s testimony: “Look, the lamb of God”, as Jesus was passing by. Following this, Andrew and the ‘other disciple of John’ spent a day with Jesus at Jesus’ invitation and after that Andrew went to his brother, Peter, and said to him, “We have found the Messiah” (Jn 1: 35ff). This is how the very first disciple of Jesus recognised Jesus as the long awaited Messiah of the Jews. A day spent with Jesus was more than enough for Andrew to recognise Jesus as the Messiah; this person to person interaction is the key to understanding Jesus and his identity. The word ‘Messiah’ and its Greek equivalent ‘Christ’ means the promised deliverer of Jewish nation as prophesied in the Hebrew Bible and believed by the Jewish people.

Another way to get an accurate picture, identity and the life a person is to read an autobiographical sketch, but Jesus did not write anything expect scribbling something on the ‘ground’ when he was questioned by the teachers of the law and the Pharisees about how to punish a woman who was caught in adultery according to the law of Moses (Jn 8:3ff). However, Jesus quiet clearly identified himself through his life on this earth, his ministry of healing, miracles, preaching and living with people on the margins of society by expressing the unconditional love of God. In addition, his seven ‘I am statements’ in St. John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35; 8:12; 10:7, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1,5) are also lucid self-revelations of who Jesus is, why he came to earth to heal a fractured-world and re-establish the relationship between the creator and the created-world to inaugurate the kingdom of God. The story of Jesus has a God-centred beginning and has a heaven-bound ending in eternity. We see this ‘beginning’ in Genesis chapter one and in the prologue of John’s gospel. “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning.” The main story line of Jesus’ earthly mission can be found in Mt. 11:25-30: “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and the learned, and revealed them to little children, and no one knows the Father except the Son and to those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him. . . . Come to me, all of you who are weary, and burdened I will give you rest . . . and you will find rest for your souls. . . .”

There were many speculations about Jesus’ identity.

During Jesus’ ministry they asked, ‘is Jesus the Messiah?’

The Jewish expectation for a Messiah was for a warrior king from David’s line to liberate them from foreign occupation. Instead, what they observed was a servant king. It is in this context, while in Caesarea Philippi; Jesus

asked his disciple, “Who do people say the son of man is?” Then Jesus particularly wanted to know what his disciples thought about his identity and asked pointedly: “Who do you say I am?” Peter’s confession about the identity of Jesus was a divine revelation, from the ‘Father in heaven’, and Peter said: “You are the Christ, the son of the living God” (Mt 16:13ff). However, Jesus warned his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Christ.

There are all sort of fanciful speculations why Jesus wanted to keep his identity to a very small brand of people who followed him and ‘tasted and saw’ who Jesus was. In the end, they also realised that the final revelation of Jesus’ identity led him to his crucifixion and an everlasting an unquantifiable victory in the resurrection of Jesus.

It does not matter how others, including: theologians, scholars, historians, agnostics or atheists, think and propagate their ideas about Jesus; what matters is what we think who Jesus is in our lives. The early Christians had difficulty in making others to appreciate and accept the salvation story in and through Jesus. This was because Jews expected a king who would conquer, not a Messiah who would ride on a donkey, cleanse the temple and so forth, and certainly not a Messiah who would be crucified. The apostles and the church fathers could layout their reasons and arguments from their lived out experience of an indwelling Jesus and through the mediation of the Holy Spirit and explain how Jesus fit the criteria for the expected Messiah of the Old Testament prophecies. This was not so when dealing with Gentiles because they had no knowledge of the Hebrew Scriptures.

Therefore, they had to begin at the beginning as St. John did in his prologue.

Another example of this is Paul’s address at the Areopagus (Acts 17:16ff). Paul begins his address by proclaiming that the God he is talking about is the ‘God who made the world and everything in it,’ and who ‘is the Lord of heaven and earth.’ He goes on to say this God ‘does not live in temples made by human hands. From this starting point he builds up his rhetoric and instead of quoting the Hebrew Scripture, Paul quotes Greek poets: “for in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some your poets said, ‘We are his offspring.” Here Paul is laying the foundational knowledge of who God is, who we are as the children of God, and our relationship to this God, which is revealed through Jesus, his crucifixion and resurrection for the salvation of mankind and in the process establishing God’s kingdom on the earth.

In talking to people of other faiths, Christians should be able to find God’s revelation to them in their lingo and rhythm of life, and then build an understanding about Jesus for them as St. Paul did. Then they may realise that the Bible is not fairy tale, it is an account of reality and God’s concern for the world that he created. The God himself is the story teller; it begins with him; it is he who created everything out of its ‘formlessness and

3 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

emptiness’; it is the same God who came down, who became flesh, who entered history as a baby born in a manger. Jesus is the one person who died for us on the cross between two thieves and resurrected on the third day. He is the one person who is fully human, a perfect human being, yet fully divine. This was necessary to bridge the gap that human beings created between them and the creator-God. God himself took the initiative to bring the reconciliation and bridge the gap. John Stot wrote: “For giving His son, He gave himself.” The Christian experience of a God is not of a God who is far off, in the heaven, over there and out of reach, but He is a God who is always with us, Immanuel, a God who came down (Phil 2:5-8).

The question about Jesus’ identity hovered around during his ministry and even today after two millennia. The questions are: is he the Messiah, a great warrior king long awaited, or just a rabbi or a prophet along a long line of Israeli prophets? Jesus refused to acknowledge the title in public as the Messiah or as the Son of God. However, he did many things that fitted the title of a Messiah. At the trial, he was asked, ‘Are you the Son of God?’ Jesus replied, ‘You say I am.’ Therefore, they had to realise it themselves, willingly or otherwise.

Therefore, all along, throughout the ages, Jesus’ identity is a one to one experiential understanding. Archbishop Desmond Tutu had this to say about Jesus: “I pray each day. I talk to Jesus, I walk with Jesus, and I want to be like Jesus I want to learn from Jesus, Jesus and me are always together.” What an amazing testimony! This is indeed the way to understand the identity of Jesus. The invitation that Jesus extended to Andrew and his friend, ‘Come, you will see’, is open to everyone. We see the same invitation in the last book of the NT as well. “Here, I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me” (Rev 3:20). Jesus only knocks at the door gently and waits patiently for our response; Holman Hunt’s famous painting placed at St. Pauls’ Cathedral in London, based on this theme, ‘The Light of the World’, has no handle on the outside of the door; the door has to be opened from inside to invite Jesus in to have an indwelling experience with him. The way to know Jesus and his identity is to invite him to have an intimate table-fellowship with him. It is indeed ‘in Christ we live and move and have our being’.

I want to thank all the contributors of this issue. Thank you for being partners of this dialogue. May these articles help you in some way in your journey with Christ for carrying out God’s mission. May God’s blessings be with you all at all times. Hope and pray that contents of the articles in this issue may help you to be more close to our Lord Jesus Christ during this lent season. FOCUS WISHES YOU

AND YOUR FAMILY A HAPPY EASTER

CONGRATULATIONS TO RT. REV. DR. GEEVARGHESE MAR THEODOSIUS EPISCOPA OF MAR THOMA CHURCH

We, the editorial board of the FOCUS, rejoice at the news of the elevation of The Rt. Revd Dr. Geevarghese Mar Theodosius Episcopa as the Suffragan Metropolitan of the Mar Thoma Church. We thank God for his servant ministry and his concerns for the under privileged people in society. His help for the HIV/AID sufferers, gender equality and for the transgender people has highlighted the needs of many victims and increased the awareness of their issues and problems. Let us pray for the Suffragan Metropolitan’s health and wellbeing for continuing God’s mission for establishing a longing for justice, relationship, truth and spirituality.

Dr. Zac Varghese, London Member, FOCUS Editorial Board http://www.issuu.com/diasporafocus http://www.scribd.com/diasporafocus Disclaimer: Diaspora FOCUS is a non-profit organization registered in United States, originally formed in late Nineties in London for the Diaspora Marthomites. Now it is an independent lay-movement of the Diaspora laity of the Syrian Christians; and as such FOCUS is not an official publication of any denominations. It is an ecumenical journal to focus attention more sharply on issues to help churches and other faith communities to examine their own commitment to loving their neighbors and God, justice, and peace. Opinions expressed in any article or statements are of the individuals and are not to be deemed as an endorsement of the view expressed therein by Diaspora FOCUS. Thanks.

Web Site: www.facebook.com/groups/mtfocus E-Mail: mtfousgroup@gmail.com

FOCUS EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS: Dr. Zac Varghese, London Dr. Titus Mathews, Calgary Revd Dr. M. J. Joseph, Kottayam Lal Varghese, Esq., Dallas Dr. Jesudas M. Athyal, Thiruvalla Revd Dr. Valson Thampu, Trivandrum

4 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

“ARE YOU THE ONE WHO IS TO COME, OR ARE WE TO WAIT FOR ANOTHER?” Mrs. Denise Mordell, London [The following article is based on a sermon delivered on the third Sunday in Advent, “Gaudete” Sunday, in 2019 at All Saints’ Harrow Weald, Anglican Church. It is this sermon, which encouraged us to select the theme for the April issue of the FOCUS. We are grateful to Mrs. Mordell for her ministry.]

This is the question John the Baptist has been considering, thinking about, it must have been causing him concern and he needed his question to be answered? But why we might ask ourselves? Why would John need to ask this question? Have you ever had an expectation where you are positive, absolutely certain you think know without doubt, 100% of the outcome, exactly what is going to happen? An expectation that you would receive the birthday gift you wanted, pass an important exam, and get the job you desired? But, it didn’t happen. Your expectation was squashed, deflated and doubt crept in? I am sure we can all relate to this scenario. Let us keep the idea of expectation in our minds as we consider the context around which this question John was considering had arisen.

“ARE YOU THE ONE WHO IS TO COME, OR ARE WE TO WAIT FOR ANOTHER”

Jesus was in Galilee with his disciples teaching and preaching, in stark contrast John the Baptist had been imprisoned by King Herod Antipas for publicly speaking of Herod’s adultery with his brother Philip’s wife Herodias. No longer able to continue his ministry proclaiming the coming of the Messiah, by making straight the path by preaching and baptizing with water for the repentance of sins. We might ask ourselves; did John doubt that Jesus was the Messiah? From his restrained environment, did John need clarification directly from Jesus? Perhaps if we were isolated, afraid we might doubt our belief, our trust and our expectation in our Lord.

Had John not been chosen and sent by God as a witness to the light, to testify to the light, so the true light would enlighten everyone. Had John not leapt for joy in his mother Elizabeth’s womb, when Mary visited her cousin Elizabeth with her joyful news? Had John not been chosen and sent by God to preach and baptize with water for the repentance of sins. Did John not baptize Jesus in the Jordan and testify, “I myself have seen and testify that this is the Son of God” Why then was John questioning whether Jesus was the Messiah?

Let us pause here and reflect on the belief system of the Jewish people and their awaited Messiah. Israel’s people were chosen by God and they expected “their”

God to send “their’ nation a powerful, all conquering king, to free their nation from the Roman oppression, reigning and bringing prosperity to Israel. Their Messiah would be an anointed king, a warrior king, suggestive of King David who would be expected to restore Israel to its former glory. John’s question was asking if Jesus was the long awaited redeemer and restorer of Israel or not?

John was a man of his time so could this have been John’s shared expectation. Did Jesus’ ministry, his words, and his actions measure up to the Jewish concept of their awaited Messiah? John sends two of his disciples to ask Jesus,“ Are you the one who is to come, or are we to wait for another?”

So, how does Jesus choose to answer John’s question?

Jesus would know John had come directly to him to have his concerns or doubt’s or expectations answered.

John’s ministry had now come to an end, whilst imprisoned John’s doubts may have begun to grow, was Jesus the true messiah? John may have needed reassurance that his ministry stood on the truth. John also knew Jesus could only speak the truth. Jesus chooses to share the truth with John, through his works, actions and teaching, quoting the prophet Isaiah and in doing so confirming that, “yes” He is the one who is to come, the “Messiah”.

Jesus is truly the prophesied Messiah who has come not as a “warrior king” bringing violence and killing to achieve freedom for His people, but as a very different king, a servant king, ushering in the kingdom of God by preaching and healing and feeding the people, bringing the good news (the gospel) of hope to the poor. A nonviolent, pastoral kingdom where the power of love of would be the absolute message, where there is no hierarchy and equality is shared by all. Jesus’ actions clearly demonstrate Isaiah’s prophecy that the blind will see, the lame will walk, the deaf will hear, the dead are raised. All signs that human life would be transformed, the barren land would bloom and become fertile with streams of living water. These are all signs of the kingdom of God, pointing to God’s rule being restored through our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Jesus is fulfilling Isaiah’s prophesy, not with fire and brimstone, or violence or loss of life, but with care, love, equality and healing, bringing social justice for all God’s people.

Perhaps our expectations have the power to limit our ability to hear, see and accept openly the kingdom of God? There is more than physical hearing, and seeing.

Our own expectations or self-belief may limit and reduce our openness to the possibility of the Holy Spirit filling us with joy, love, hope and spiritual awareness of being in and part of the kingdom of God Do we recognise, or can

5 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

we identify where we see the kingdom of God reflected in the way we live our lives, and in our society . . .

Something to think about?

Jesus sends Johns’ disciples to share what they have heard and seen with John. Jesus would have known that John might still have doubts on hearing what his disciples had to say on their return. However, Jesus also knew that John would recognise the prophecy of Isaiah and hearing this spoken from Jesus’ lips he would accept this as the truth and be able to let go of his doubt and meet his death in peace knowing Jesus was truly the Messiah.

Jesus then turns to the crowd and asks what they expected to see in the desert? A shaken reed, a person wearing soft robes? Was this what they expected? A shaken reed can be found on Herod’s coins, soft robes in a palace? These may have been a comparison of the symbolism of Herods’ sinful kingship, whereas John had stood firm in the strength of his calling to serve God, in camel hair and leather, preaching of the Messiah who was to come, baptizing with water for the repentance of sin with no finery no soft robes or palaces. Jesus confirms John’s status as a prophet, which is the fulfilment of the prophecy of Malachi by saying “See, I am sending my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way before you.”

John was indeed a prophet sent by God to prepare the people for the coming of Jesus. He was as great a prophet as Elijah and the last of the prophets. Jesus from his own lips states “he was the greatest of men”!

Yet, in the kingdom of God he is the least, what a paradox? How can you be such an amazing prophet, chosen by God, the forerunner for Jesus and yet be the very least? How does this work? The word equality, is so, so important and key in understanding being great and being the least in the kingdom of God, the poor, the sick, the lame, the deaf, the marginalised are far greater; equality is the measure of God’s love for all. God loves all of us equally and not in relation to the deeds we have done.

May I ask this question, “How is the kingdom of God reflected, now, as we approach Christmas in our society? As we move through this advent season preparing for and waiting for our Messiah? How do we reflect the joy, love and hope of the kingdom? We have choices we can make? We could indulge ourselves in the spirit of Christmas, “Materially”, ignoring the pastoral wellbeing of our neighbours and local community by being self-focusi and not seeing or hearing the needs of others.

“hearing”, by being the eyes, ears, hands of our lord Jesus Christ as we are called to continue his work within the body of Christ, by sharing the love, joy and hope we have in our Lord expressed in his words, works and actions. May we all during this advent rejoice in the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ as we patiently wait, expectantly, as we all physically and spiritually share our joy and love with our neighbours.

To all who need healing, wholeness and holiness may we remember that if our Lord considered John the Baptist was the greatest of men, then during Advent and everyday of our lives, we who are not prophets, should recall we are all called by our Lord, the Messiah, as was John, to do His bidding joyfully, that the least in God’s kingdom is to be celebrated. Take time from the business of the “materialism” of Christmas to reflect on the doubts that John experienced through his own expectations whilst imprisoned, take time to reflect? And know when Jesus spoke the truth through Isaiah, John knew who Jesus was as he could only speak the truth.

May we all take our worries and doubts to our Lord in prayer.

“Rejoice, rejoice the lord is near” is the resounding cry of this the third Sunday in Advent, “Gaudete” Sunday where we light a pink or rose candle in the Advent wreath to symbolise our joy and our love and our hope in God through our Messiah our Lord Jesus Christ, as we expectantly open our hearts and minds, nourishing ourselves as we patiently wait casting aside our doubts or demands on our faith by taking our time to prepare through prayer, fasting and reflection that we may be ready to embrace our servant king through our words and in our works, reflected in our daily lives.

As we are spiritually renewed and refilled by the Holy Spirit the joy, love and hope we feel within us we may share with our friends, families and with those who are stranger’s through Jesus Christ, the personification of God our Father who being both human and divine showed us the true character of our God. Let us celebrate the symbolisation of this Gaudete Advent Sunday praising God through our Lord Jesus Christ for his Messianic gifts of joy, love and hope for all humanity, embracing his coming and being alert, ready and able to hear our Advent calling, “REJOICE, REJOICE THE LORD IS NEAR”.

Mrs.

Denise Mordell is a qualified physiotherapist, who has given up her practice and undergoing training to become a pastoral assistant in the Church of England, she is also Conversely, we could open wide our hearts and minds a trained preacher and a and embrace the needs of others by “seeing” and member of the church choir.

6 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

ARE YOU THE MESSIAH? David Brand, London Having just read the title you would naturally respond with “What a daft question? Of course not!” However, please read on because on completing this short article, hopefully you may have something to seriously think about or if you prefer, dismiss it out of hand.

The Jews considered their Messiah to be a future Jewish king from the Davidic line who is expected to be anointed with holy anointing oil and rule the Jewish people during the Messianic age and the world to come. They do not consider the Messiah to be God or a pre-existent divine Son of God. The Messianic age is defined as a future period of time on earth in which the Messiah will reign and bring universal peace and brotherhood and evil will cease to exist.

In both Mathew and Luke (Mt.11: 2-19; Lk. 7: 19-28) we have two virtually identical recorded incidents, John has been thrown into prison having criticised King Herod for marrying his brother’s wife. He hears of Jesus’ activities and sends two of his disciples to make enquiries. They say to Jesus “Are you he, who is to come, or shall we look for another?” He replies “Go and tell John what you have seen and heard: the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, the poor have good news preached to them and blessed is he who takes no offense at me.”

This raises two very interesting questions and the first is: Why did John have to ask this question in the first place?

After all he was Jesus’ cousin and we also know of the reaction of John in Elizabeth’s womb on her hearing the news of Mary’s pregnancy with Jesus. We have also been made aware of the unusual events surrounding John’s baptism of Jesus and his acknowledgement of Jesus’ divinity.

In John 3:22-36, we have further proof that John knew that Jesus was no ordinary human, but a being of heavenly origin. And they came to John, and said to him, “Rabbi, he who was with you beyond the Jordan, to whom you bore witness, here he is, baptizing, and all are going to him.”

John answered, “No one can receive anything except what is given him from heaven. You yourselves bear me witness that I said; I am not the Christ, but I have been sent before him. He who has the bride is the bridegroom; the friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices greatly at the bridegroom’s voice; therefore this joy of mine is now full. He must increase, but I must decrease. He who comes from above is above all; he who is of the earth belongs to the earth, and of the earth he speaks; he who comes from heaven is above all. He bears witness to what he has seen and heard, yet no one

receives his testimony; he who receives his testimony sets his seal to this, that God is true. For he whom God has sent utters the words of God, for it is not by measure that he gives the Spirit; the Father loves the son, and has given all things into his hand. He who believes in the Son has eternal life; he who does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God rests upon him.”

In John 1: 32, we read about John’s testimony: “I saw the Spirit descend as a dove from heaven and remain on him.

I myself did not know him; but he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, “He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit. And I have seen and have borne witness that this is the Son of God”. Surely from these statements there can be no doubt about John’s realisation of who Jesus really was so why was it necessary to ask the question in the first place?

Also the second question is why John not received a direct answer to a clear simple question in Matthew’s Gospel “Are you he, who is to come (the long awaited Messiah) or shall we look for another?” Jesus replies; “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have good news preached to them. And blessed is he who takes no offence at me.”

You might like to think that the question and answer was deliberately vague for our benefit in order to challenge us; so that every Christian from now to eternity, would, like John, have to ask this question of themselves and make their own independent decision about who Jesus was. On the other hand if by prematurely and publicly admitting that he was the Messiah, it would probably have resulted in Jesus keeping his cousin company in Herods’ jail and then be executed, completing the attempted assassination by the previous King Herod (Matthew 2:16) by “Killing all the male children in Bethlehem and in all in that region

7 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

who were two years old or under, according to the time which he had ascertained from the Wise Men.” My answer to John’s question used to be a categorical Yes, but when you really examine the definition of a Messiah and search a bit deeper into the Bible then you understand the reason for Jesus’ reply, it could be interpreted as implying that you must judge for yourself from his works or put another way, is this the kind of work a warrior and ruler Messiah would do?

A similar question is asked by the woman of Samaria at Jacob’s well in John’s Gospel; “I know that the Messiah is coming, he who is called Christ; when he comes, he will show us all things.” Jesus said to her. “I who speak to you am he.” Was Jesus acknowledging his name or the Messiah label? Or did he feel safe in revealing himself to the Samaritans due to their complete isolation and contempt by the Jews.

Before his crucifixion he told the Jews, “If I do not live in a Godly way, then do not believe that I am the son of God. If, however I do live in a Godly way, and then believe, based on my life, that I am from the Father and then you will understand that the father is within me and I am within him”. My teaching is an awakening of life. Whoever believes in my teaching, although he may die in the flesh, will remain living and everyone who lives and believes in me will not die”. There is no mention of being a Messiah.

At his trial before the Council as described in Mark’s Gospel (14:56-64), For many bore false witness against him and their witness did not agree. And some stood up and bore false witness against him, saying “We heard him say,’ I will destroy this temple that is made with our hands, and in three days I will build another, not made with hands.’” Yet not even so did their testimony agree. And the High priest stood up in their midst and asked Jesus, “Have you no answer to make? What is it that these men testify against you?” But he was silent and made no answer. Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Christ, the son of the Blessed?”

This is the dramatic climax that would decide on the future of Christianity and on this question Jesus must have understood that this was the pivotal moment and despite his natural human fear as demonstrated in the Garden of Gethsemane, he knew he had to give an answer that would reveal himself to the world and guarantee his execution in order to fulfil his acceptance of carrying out the Father’s will and he therefore replies, “I am, and you will see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven”. Pease note no mention of being a Messiah even in this, his final statement that causes the High Priest to tear his clothes in anger and condemn him to death with the agreement all the other priests.

God’s plan is now put into motion with all its brutal demonstrations of the worst in human behaviour, a price Jesus has to pay in order for us to have a new way of life and acknowledge a loving and caring God far removed from those of the past and create a new future based on a law of love, respect, tolerance, forgiveness and generosity.

We also learn the reason for our existence and also a glimpse into the future that awaits us. Also at a time before the Transfiguration he asks his disciples, “And what do you understand of my teaching?” Simon Peter replied “In my opinion, your teaching is that you are the Chosen Son of the God of Life. You teach that God is the life that exists within man.” Jesus replied, “Blessed are you Simon that you have understood. A person could not have revealed that to you, but you understand it because the God inside you has revealed it to you. It was not mortal reasoning and it was not me with my words that revealed it to you, but God my father revealed it to you directly. On that rests the foundation for the gathering of chosen people, for whom there is no death”.

Tolstoy in his superb book, ‘The Gospel In Brief’, writes the following; “And again, for the third time, Jesus taught the people. He said, “People are devoting themselves to my teaching and not because I prove it myself, it is impossible to prove the truth. Truth proves everything else. But people devote themselves to my teaching because it is unified and is familiar to people, and it promises life. For the people, my teaching is like the familiar voice of the shepherd is for the sheep, when he comes in at the gate and gathers them in order to take them to pasture. No one believes your teaching because it is foreign to people, and people notice within it your lusts. For the people, your teaching is the same as the appearance of a stranger who does not enter at the gate, but climbs over the fence for the sheep. The sheep do not know him and can sense that he is an outlaw.”

“My teaching is the one truth, like the one gate for the sheep. All of your teaching from the Law of Moses is a lie.

It is all like thieves and outlaws for the sheep. Whoever devotes themselves to my teaching will find true life, just as the sheep go out and find food if they follow the shepherd. Because a thief only comes intending to steal, plunder and destroy, but the shepherd comes to give life.

And only my teaching promises and gives true life.

There are those shepherds for whom the sheep are their entire lives and who would give those lives for the sheep.

These are true shepherds. But there are also hired workers, those that are not too troubled about the sheep, because they are just hired workers and the sheep do not belong to them, those who, if a wolf comes near drop

8 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

everything and run, allowing the wolf to destroy the sheep.

These are not true shepherds.”

“Likewise, there are false shepherds, those that have no stake in the lives of the people and there are true ones, those that give their souls for the lives of the people. I am such a teacher. My teaching is to give my life for the people. No one can take it from me; I myself am freely giving it for the people, in order to receive true life. I received this commandment from my father. And just as the father knows me, I know the father, and therefore I lay down my life for the people. And for that, the father loves me, because I am keeping his commandments. And all people, not only those here and now, but all people will understand my voice and they will all gather together as one; all people will be unified and their teaching will be one.”

The Jews surrounded him and said, “Do not torment us, just tell us, simply and directly are you that Messiah who is supposed to come into the world according to the scripture?” Jesus answered them, “I already told you who I am, but you do not believe me. If you do not believe my words, then believe my actions. Through them, you will understand who I am and for what purpose I have come.

But you do not believe, because you do not follow me.

Whoever follows after me and does what I say will understand me. And whoever understands my teaching and fulfils it will receive actual life. . . My father has united them with me and no one can divide us. The father and I are one.”

In his own words Jesus was telling the Jews he was not the Messiah that they wanted, he was no straightforward conquering hero on a white horse who would clear out the Romans and rule Israel in order to prove some ancient scripture. This was a different, a very difficult and complex relationship between God and a specially chosen individual that through the spirit combined love, duty and sacrifice, something the Jews were never going to understand from their perspective and their beliefs. This was something the world desperately needed but never appreciated until all the events ran their course culminating in the resurrection. Realisation is still dawning on the population thanks to the efforts and sacrifice of many dedicated and gifted people still working to this very day!

In my humble opinion, the job description of a Messiah is totally inappropriate for Jesus Christ; he is no mere Messiah he was and still is the perfect human and spiritual interface between God and ourselves; the ideal human being and the spiritual son of God that has set the standard for our behaviour and faith. The idea of being destined to rule Israel, solve the Palestinian problem and also to maintain cordial Arab relationships is just plain ludicrous, even just containing his sphere of influence to

our little blue planet in the vastness of space puts unacceptable constraints to his limitless potential, no wonder he gave no affirmative and definitive answer; his silence on the matter of a Messiah speaks volumes.

Simon Peter got it exactly right, but only because God revealed it to him as Jesus so aptly points out. Maybe in not accepting being a Messiah Jesus is challenging us to be his chosen people to continue his mission by example, thought, word and deed. All of us are the present day result of his teaching, healing, supreme sacrifice and resurrection. I sincerely hope and pray that we and all those who follow us will never disappoint. We are the present having the awesome responsibility to ensure that there will be a future for his teaching, his sacrifice and for the Christian religion; taking it for granted is not an option, only we, in this physical world can create God’s Kingdom on earth by living Jesus’ five commandments as an example to all people on earth to bring peace and respect to mankind.

My human role model Leo Tolstoy wrote: “The fulfilment of Christ’s five commandments will make the lives of men such as each human heart seeks and longs for. All men will be brethren; each will be at peace with the other, and each will be free to enjoy the blessings of this world during the term of life allotted to him by God. ‘Men will turn their swords into ploughshares and their spears into pruning hooks.’ And on earth will be established the kingdom of God; the kingdom of peace that was promised by the prophets, which drew nearer with John the Baptist, and which Christ announced in the words of Isiah: ‘The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because He hath anointed me to preach the Gospel to the poor; He hath sent me to heal the broken-hearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind; to set at liberty them that are bruised, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord.’ The simple and clear commandments of peace, given by Christ, by which all causes of dissension are foreseen and turned aside, reveal the kingdom of God on earth to men.” Thus Christ is truly the Messiah.

We will conclude with Jesus having the last word with the very challenging statement he made in John 14: 12-14.

“Truly, truly I say to you, he who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than that will he do, because I go to the Father. Whatever you ask in my name, I will do it; that the Father may be glorified in the Son, if you ask anything in my name, I will do it.”

What an incredible promise and challenge to make to all humankind stretching to eternity, how you could turn down an invitation like that, However it comes with an ego warning “THE LEADER OF ALL MUST BE THE SERVANT OF ALL.” Any potential Messiah’s need not apply.

9 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

Seeking the True Jesus V. Georgekutty, Karunagapplly, Kerala “Jesus Christ belonged to the true race of prophets. He saw with open eye the mystery of the soul” (Ralph Waldo Emerson). st

The 1 century works of Jewish historian Flavius Josephus refer to at least twenty different people with the name Jesus in his works. In the context of the New Testament, the etymology of the term Jesus is generally as "Yahweh is salvation". Jesus has been generally referred to as "Jesus Christ", almost from the beginning of Christianity. The title ‘Christ’ is derived from the Greek word ‘Christos’, a translation of the Hebrew ‘mashiakh’ 1 meaning the "anointed". It is usually transliterated into English as "Messiah". Christians of the time designated Jesus as "the Christ" because they believed him to be the Messiah, whose arrival was foretold in the Hebrew Bible.

Modern scholars of antiquity mostly agree that Jesus existed historically, although the quest for the historical Jesus has produced little agreement on the reliability of the Gospels and on how closely the Jesus portrayed in the Bible reflects the historical Jesus. The "Jesus" of history is not a complete mystery to Biblical scholars, who often make a distinction between the man and the religious figure depicted in the scriptures. We do know some things about the historical Jesus - less than some Christians think, but more than some skeptics think. Although there are scholarly works that argue Jesus never existed, a vast majority of Christian and non-Christian scholars believe that there are sufficient evidence to accept that Jesus did exist.

Jesus was born sometime just before 4 BCE since historians estimate that King Herod had died around this time. He grew up in Nazareth, a small village in Galilee.

His father was a carpenter. Jesus too might have pursued the same career, although we cannot be certain considering the absence of recorded information. Jesus was raised Jewish and he remained deeply Jewish all through his life. His mission was not to create a new religious faith. He apparently saw himself as doing something within Judaism – a Jewish Reformation. He left Nazareth as an adult. He was baptized by John the Baptist.

During his baptism, Jesus apparently experienced some sort of divine vision.

Shortly afterwards, Jesus began his public preaching with the message that the world could be transformed into a "Kingdom of God.” Jesus was often being referred to as "Rabbi", a Hebrew word representing a spiritual teacher.

Jesus debated with fellow Jews on how best to follow God. He gathered many followers. He became a noted healer. The Jewish leadership was offended because Jesus questioned their hypocrisy.

Consequent to a Jewish conspiracy to eliminate him, Jesus was arrested

and tried by the Jewish law enforcers. He was executed under the orders of Pontius Pilate, the then Roman administrator of Judea. His followers believed that he rose from the dead on the third day. They claimed to have visions of Jesus. Only after his death did his followers declare Jesus to be "Lord" or "the Son of God.” The community of his followers eventually became the early Church.

Christian doctrines include the beliefs that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit, was born of a virgin named Mary, preached the Gospel, performed miracles, died by crucifixion as a sacrifice to achieve atonement, rose from the dead, and ascended into Heaven, from where he will return.

The fundamental doctrine of Christian faith captured in the ‘Nicene Creed’ asserts that Jesus will judge the living and the dead, an event tied to the Second Coming of Jesus in Christian eschatology.

Most Christians believe Jesus enables people who are sinners by default to be reconciled to God. In between the above points, the historical details are hard to verify, says Marcus Borg, American New Testament 2 scholar. Borg believes that the importance of the less "plausible" stories found in the Bible lies not in whether they actually happened but in what they meant to the followers of Jesus. Borg says, "If we understand these stories as parables about Jesus — as metaphorical narratives about him — then the question of their factuality vanishes as an important question. With this approach, it does not matter whether Jesus was born of virgin or changed water into wine or walked on water. To those who insist on their factuality, I would say, 'Fine — let's not argue about that. Now, let's talk about what they mean.”

In Islam, Jesus (commonly transliterated as Isa) is considered one of God's important prophets. Muslims believe Jesus was a bearer of scripture but was not the Son of God. The Qur’an states that Jesus himself never claimed divinity. Most Muslims believe that he was not crucified, but was physically raised into Heaven by Allah the God of Abraham. In contrast, Rabbinic Judaism rejects the belief that Jesus was the awaited Messiah, arguing that he did not fulfil Messianic prophecies. They do not believe that he was divine or he had risen.

During his lifetime, the disciples of Jesus might have begun to think of him as the Messiah (“Christ”), the anointed one who would restore the fortunes of Israel.

After his death and resurrection, his followers regularly referred to him as the Messiah (Acts 2:36). At some point,

10 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

his adherents also began to refer to him as “Son of God.” Apostle Paul employed both “Christ” and “Son of God” freely. He is also responsible for the widespread use of the term “Christ” as if it were the name of Jesus rather than his title.

“Son of God” is a term in the Hebrew Bible used metaphorically (God is the father, human beings are his children), and this usage continued in post-biblical Jewish literature. The Jewish people in general could be called “sons of God”. The singular form, “son of God”, could be applied to individuals who were especially close to God. What Apostle Paul had meant by “Christ” and “Son of God” cannot be known with certainty. In Philippians 2:6– 11 Apostle Paul states that Jesus Christ was pre-existent and came to earth: he “emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness.” This sounds as if Jesus was a heavenly being, who had only appeared to be human. In Romans 1:1–6, however, Paul writes that God declared Jesus to be “Son of God” by raising him from the dead. It seems to indicate that Jesus was a human being whom God ‘adopted’ as His Son. After centuries of debate, the Church decided that Jesus was both wholly divine and wholly human. But it only makes things more confusing to thinking people.

Why does it matter whether or not Jesus is God? If Jesus is not God, his death would not have been sufficient to pay the penalty for the sins of humanity (1 John 2:2). Only God could pay such an infinite penalty (Romans 5:8; 2 Corinthians 5:21). The issue was vexatious for the Church. Jesus had to be God so that he could pay humanity’s debt. And Jesus had to be man so that Pontius Pilate could hang him on a cross. Jesus could be the way of salvation only if he is God. So Jesus makes the proclamation, “I am the way and the truth and the life.

No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6). Jesus had also made claims to be the bread of life (John 6:35), the good shepherd (John 10:11), the true vine (John 15:1), the giver of living water (John 4:10), the light of the world (John 8:12), the future judge (John 5:22-23), the lamb of God (John 1:36), the door of salvation (John 10:9), the Saviour (John 3:14-16), the Messiah (John 4:26), and the healer (Luke 18:42).

The New Testament says that Jesus had vanished into the clouds that had hovered over Mount of Olive, some two thousand years ago. He did not leave any written records of his life or teachings. We are not certain that he was literate, although some of the events recorded in the Gospels indicate that he could read and write. Whatever we know about Jesus comes solely from what have been written subsequently. But, all the writings that became known had not been accepted by the organized Church.

The Church Fathers picked and chose only those writings that would conform with the kind of faith they had 3 envisioned for the members of the organized Church. The

rest were branded as ‘heresies’ and were mostly burnt to ashes in order to save later generations of Christians from deviating from the ‘true path’. Thus, what we know about Jesus is what the early Church had decided in its wisdom to be appropriate for the faithful. Consequently, our knowledge of Jesus is anchored primarily on the four Canonical Gospels included in the ‘New Testament’ part of the Bible.

The Gospels are not eyewitness accounts. They were written some 35 to 65 years after the crucifixion of Jesus.

It arose out of separate oral traditions that had taken shape in the dispersed Christian communities. Jesus died in about the year 30 CE. The Gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke date to about 65 to 85 CE, and have sources and themes in common. The Gospel of John, which is distinct from the rest, was composed sometime between 90 and 95 CE. So when we read about Jesus in these Gospels, what we are getting is not history but memory memory shaped by time, by shades of emphasis and by efforts to make distinctive theological points. And, as we can see from a comparison of the content of the various Gospels, that memory was already blurred even in that early period of its writing.

The objective of the Gospel writers was not to present an accurate biography of Jesus or to narrate the incidents connected with his life like journalists reporting events.

The Gospels were written at a time of increasing persecutions against Christians. It apparently sought to focus on strengthening the resolve of the faithful to stand steadfast in their faith in the face of the challenges they encountered. Gospels carry ‘Good News’ appropriate to the communities it sought to address. Thus, the Jesus of the Gospels is more an ‘interpreted Jesus’ than the real Jesus. So, one time or the other, we are constrained to ask ourselves, ‘Who is the real Jesus behind the carefully chosen scripture narratives?’

Very few historians of the times of Jesus, mention Jesus in their works. As far as we know, the first author outside the church to mention Jesus is the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (37-101 CE), who wrote a history of Judaism around 93 CE. Another writer who mentions Christ in his writings is Tacitus (Publius (or Gaius) Cornelius Tacitus, circa 56 – circa 120 CE). He was a senator and a historian of the Roman Empire. From Tacitus we learn that Jesus was executed while Pontius Pilate was the Roman administrator in charge of Judaea (26-36 CE) and Tiberius was emperor (14-37 CE) – reports that fit with the timeframe of the Gospels. Another important source of evidence about Jesus and early Christianity is found in the letters of Pliny the Younger to Emperor Trajan. But these references are mostly passing and indirect.

11 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

So, the obvious question is: Why did ancient historians ignore Jesus in their works? The likely reason was that Jesus was not someone considered worthy of occupying the precious pages of history books. Jewish historian Josephus tells us about a number of prophets who appeared and gathered followers. They promised to part the waters of the Jordan or make the walls of Jerusalem fall down and so on. They were all wiped out by the Roman Governors. Their followers were scattered. We can find a mention of this in the Book of Acts (Acts 5:3637). All those ‘Messiahs’ simply died and exited from history once for all. It is quite likely that contemporary historians did not consider Jesus as any more authentic than the rest of the lot that had perished forever.

Jesus taught people mostly through parables. He had lived and worked among the poor and ordinary people and used examples from their daily lives. So his parables had lambs, sheep and shepherds, rich and poor, landlords and serfs, slaves and masters, sowers and harvesters and those threshing wheat and pressing grapes.

His knowledge and insight into the lives of the common folk perhaps came from his own life of penury. So he says, “No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment. For the patch will pull away from the garment and a worse tear will result” (Matthew 9:16).

We are not sure whether Apostle Paul had ever met Jesus, although both were in Jerusalem more or less during the same period. But Paul had a picture of Jesus in his mind. Perhaps, he had at least two of them. One of them turned him to an aggressive persecutor of Christians in Jerusalem. But on the road to Damascus, he received a vision that knocked him down. It also knocked down the image of Jesus he had carried in his mind until then. A new image took its place. Other Apostles had different images of Jesus. Those who came into the Christian fold had their own ideas about Jesus. The process of the portraying of Jesus in various images, according the understanding of people, continues even today.

The general perception that Christianity had started as a single faith to split later into various factions because of disagreements over the interpretations of the content of the Scripture or because of ideological or other differences is apparently misplaced. The disunity arising out of the theology and rituals remained a reality from the very beginning. Even the Apostles Peter and Paul had serious disagreements.

People had conflicting ideas and imaginations about Jesus and his mission. This deepens the mystery of Jesus.

Each individual on the mission to understand Jesus tends to create his or her own interpretations and images of Jesus. Consequently, people have understood Jesus as someone standing alone on the periphery of the society, or as a friend and liberator of the proletariat, or a rebel

who had challenged the belief systems of orthodox Judaism, or a revolutionary who had tried to assail the corrupt Jewish leadership and ruthless Roman hegemony, or the Son of God, or the sacrificial lamb for the atonement of the sins of the world…

Incidentally, the question, ‘Who is Jesus?’ was raised during the lifetime of Jesus. Even in his hometown where he had grown up, people did not really understand who Jesus was (Matthew 13:54-56). The situation was no better outside his hometown (Matthew 16:13-14). And Jerusalem too was no different (Matthew 21:10-11; John 7:25-27). Finally, Jesus decided to put an end to all the confusions and speculations about his identity. So, when Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do you say I am?” Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven…” (Matthew 16:15-17). But, even this answer failed to settle the matter. For in Judaism, there are apparently two Messiahs – one is Priest and the other is King.

Today, the Church remains fragmented into 30,000 – 40,000 denominations. Each faction invariably swears by the Gospels and preaches the Jesus of the New Testament. Yet these factions cannot come to a common understanding on the identity of Jesus or the meaning of his teachings. Thus, two thousand years after Jesus had finished his mission, we are still searching for an answer acceptable to all to the question, ‘Who is Jesus?’

However, there is no reason to be upset about the situation, because spirituality is an individual experience and not the blind acceptance of dead dogmas. Each individual is unique. The upbringing, education, thoughts and experiences are unique with regard to each individual.

And that uniqueness is constantly changing because of the ever-running chemical processes in human physical system. So, the same input generates different thoughts and experiences in different people. And none can transfer his/her experience to another person. The reality is beautifully articulated by Kahlil Gibran as follows: “No man can reveal to you aught but that which already lies half asleep in the dawning of your knowledge. The teacher who walks in the shadow of the temple, among his followers, gives not of his wisdom but rather of his faith and his lovingness. If he is indeed wise, he does not bid you enter the house of his wisdom, but rather leads you to the threshold of your own mind. The astronomer may speak to you of his understanding of space, but he cannot give you his understanding... For the vision of one man lends not its wings to another man. And even as each one of you stands alone in God's knowledge, so must each one of you be alone in his knowledge of God and in his understanding of the earth” (‘The Prophet’).

12 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

True spirituality is a personal and unique experience. It is foolish to expect everyone to accept a common image of Jesus created by another – patriarch, priest, preacher, pastor, committee or council.

The Jesus of my understanding or experience is not the Jesus of the understanding of another person. I am unique as an individual. My Jesus is unique to me alone. It is difficult to find fault with such variety in unity. What is important is integrity with regard to faith.

The tragedy of institutionalized faith is that the institution decides what the faithful should or should not believe. True spirituality has nothing to do with uniformity or conformity. Jesus said “…the truth will set you free”. The question is: would another person’s truth set me free?

Notes: 1. In biblical Judaism, sacred oil was used to anoint certain exceptionally holy people and objects as part of their religious investiture (see Leviticus 8:10–12 and Exodus 30:29).

2. Marcus J. Borg (March 11, 1942 – January 21, 2015) was an American theologian and a former professor of religion and culture at Oregon State University, who was among the most widely known and influential voices in ‘Progressive Christianity’, which is a "post-liberal movement" within Christianity "that seeks to reform the faith via the insights of post-modernism and a reclaiming of the truth beyond the verifiable historicity and factuality of the passages in the Bible by affirming the truths within the stories that may not have actually happened.”

3. The term ‘Church Fathers’ refers to any of about 70 theologians in the period from the 2nd to the 7th century whose writing established and confirmed official church doctrine. In the Roman Catholic Church, some of these people were later declared saints; some became ‘Doctor of the Church’. The best-known Latin Church Fathers are Ambrose, Augustine, Gregory the Great, and Jerome.

Those who wrote in Greek include Athanasius, Basil, Gregory Nazianzen, and John Chrysostom. *Mr. Georgekutty is a former Central government officer and academician. He is a gold medallist of the Institute of Cost Accounts of India (ICA) and its Fellow Member (FCMA). He holds postgraduate degrees in Business Management, Computer Application, Commerce, Journalism, English, History, Philosophy, Politics, Public Administration, Sociology and Gandhian Thoughts.

He is passionate in studying Philosophy and Religions. After quitting his post retirement job as director of a business school, he has been devoting his entire time on reading, writing and public speaking. He has also written a number of books. He is settled in Karunagappally, Kerala.

(Poetic Meditations)

The Last Days of Jesus on Earth Rev. Dr. M. J. Joseph, Kottayam

1. HE FALLS You are strong Yet you fell.

There were tears in your eyes Yet you wiped out other's tears.

You were stripped But you were clothed by an eclipse.

You committed your soul to the divine care But the Almighty clothed it with a body.

Lord, the weak will fall But you will raise him up.

He may shed tears But you will wipe them out.

He may go without clothes But you will clothe him with celestial attire.

He may fall in the pit But you will lift him up.

2. HE DIES You tasted death But you tasted life first.

One praised God for your death The other lamented over your fate The third saw sparks of love in your eyes.

Lord, I see your agony not on the cross But on the streets today.

I praise your sacrifice But I hesitate to go with you.

I lament over your death But I don't shed tears.

I see your glittering eye But I don't train myself to behold your face.

Forgive me, Lord.

3. THEY TOUCH HIS BODY An unknown person held your head The other held your hands They were united in love.

Their names are not known They are not remembered in prayers.

Surely, they are in the records of heaven For they brought heaven to the earth.

(Contd. on Page 13)

13 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

“I am” Sayings Revd Dr. Abraham Philip, Kottayam, Kerala The theme of this issue of FOCUS is focused on Jesus Christ. In other words to be more focused, it is on the Christological titles of Jesus. As I have been asked to write on the “I am” Sayings of Jesus we focus ourselves on the Fourth Gospel. In the Gospel according to St John, we have the author of the Gospel using a number of titles to denote who Jesus is such as Word (1:1-18), God (1:1, 18; 20:28), Light (1:4, 5, 9), Life (1:4, 5, 9; 3:16; 10:10; 20:31), the Only Son (1:14, 18). At the same time there are a host of confessions about Jesus Christ in the Fourth Gospel through various people such as the Lamb of God (1:29, 36), the one from the beginning (1:31), the one in whom the Spirit dwells (1:32-34), Son of God (1:34, 39), God’s elect (1:34), Messiah (1:41, 45), the King of Israel (1:49), Son of Man (1:51), the Rabbi from God (3:2), prophet (4:19; 6:14; 7:40), the saviour of the world (4:42), Lord (6:68; 9:38), the holy one of God (6:69), the one to i come into the world (11:27), and Lord and God (20:28) .

Moreover, we have Jesus speaking of himself using the title Son of Man (1:51; 4:13-14; 5:27; 6:27ff, 53; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31). According to the Gospels, Son of Man is the only title that Jesus applied to himself. We have also Jesus’ Claim of close relationship with the Father. The healing at the pool of Bethesda on a Sabbath is followed by a dispute over Sabbath between Jesus and the Jews (5:10ff). Jesus’ defense rests on his claim of intimate relationship with the Father (5:17-18). Jesus’ expression “My Father” implied a claim which the Jews did not miss. Because of Jesus’ close relationship to the Father, Jesus works in the same way as the Father. Jesus claims not only his oneness with the Father, but also the identity of purpose by carrying out the work of the Father.

Jesus speaks of his unity with the Father in 10:29-30 (cf.

17:22). The unity expressed in 10:30 is a unity of power and operation. This points to Jesus’ deity and affirm his oneness of will, action and purpose (This was an affirmation that led the church during the fourth century to the doctrine of the one divine nature in the Trinity). Jesus is ever in agreement with the Father (cf. 5:30; 8:16, 18), and acts in agreement with the will and direction of the Father (6:38; 8:26, 28; 10:18). “I and my Father are one” (10:30) is comparable with “the Word was God” (1:1). In the Fourth Gospel, Jesus is the unique Son. Others are children of God. Jesus further points out the identity between Jesus and the Father in his words to Philip (14:911). Jesus tells Philip that to see Jesus is to see the Father. That is, Jesus is the revelation of the Father. The words that Jesus speaks are the words of the Father, and the deeds of Jesus are the works of the Father. The exalted Johannine Christology does not permit the Fourth

Gospel to see the activity of Jesus without reference to the transcendent God. In the Fourth Gospel there is an apparent contradiction between 10:30 (“I and my Father are one”) and 14:28 (“for the Father is greater than I”) – these verses have been subject of much Christological and Trinitarian debate especially during the period of Christological controversies. While on earth Jesus becomes less than the Father. The Fourth evangelist makes clear that God in his revelation is truly God (10:30) and that Jesus does not reveal a secondary deity. Yet he is Deus revelatus, God to the extent that he can be made known, not the whole mystery of God. In the Fourth Gospel there is a greater frequency of “I am” than in the Synoptic Gospels (“I am” is used 134 times in the Fourth Gospel as against 28 times in Matthew, 17 ii times in Mark and 29 times in Luke) . Three different kinds of usages of “I am” can be distinguished in this Gospel: (i) the absolute use with no predicate; (ii) the use where a predicate may be implied though not expressed; (iii) the use with a predicate nominative. The absolute use with no predicate refers to the messianic identity of Jesus. All the passages where this use occurs are linked by Jesus’ claim to a totally unique mode of being, which transcends human categories. It seems to suggest Jesus as one who bears the divine name “I am” as used in the Hebrew Bible.

This is made more explicit in the Fourth Gospel by the second usage of the formula, where the predicate is understood. Here the formula has a revelatory significance, which goes beyond a mere messianic identification of Jesus.

In the miracle of Jesus walking on the Sea of Galilee (6:16-21) John emphasizes a divine epiphany centred on the expression “I am” (v. 20). The majesty of Jesus gets prominence and it is that of the one who bears the divine name. In 18:5-9, the soldiers come to arrest Jesus. When Jesus reveals who he is through “I am”, they step back and fall on the ground. The confusion is not just that of astonishment, but a reaction to divine revelation. The above two incidents show that “I am” in the Fourth Gospel has associations with its usage in the Hebrew Bible. Jesus speaks emphatically as Yahweh speaks in the Jewish Scriptures (especially Exodus 3:14).

“When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will realize that I am he” (8:28). This is used as an emphatic self-identification (cf. 8:24; 13:19). They also point to the divinity of Jesus, which will be manifested through his glorification. These usages cannot be explained by the parallels in the Synoptic Gospels (Mark 6:50; Matt 14:27), where the phrase “I am” is used as a simple affirmative.

14 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

The glorified Jesus is confirmed as Lord and God (John 20:28). The implication of divinity in the use of “I am” is confirmed by the fact that the Jews tried to stone him when he said, “Before Abraham was born, I am” (8:58).

In the Fourth Gospel, Jesus is the eschatological revealer of God’s name. What Jesus had done on earth was to reveal God to people. It is to make the name of God known (17:6). The name of God, which Jesus revealed is “I am”. In the Fourth Gospel there are seven instances where Jesus presents himself as “I am” with a predicate nominative. These predicates are symbols familiar to Palestinians and they have theological significance in Judaism. In the predicate nominative, the emphasis on the predicate which tells something of the role of Jesus. It is a description of Jesus in relation to humanity. Jesus is the source of eternal life to humanity (vine, life, resurrection), he is the means through which humanity finds life (way, gate); he leads people to life (shepherd); he is God’s selfrevelation (truth), and he is the one who nourishes the human life (bread). In each case, “I am” illustrates some function of Jesus – to sustain, to illuminate, to admit, to take care for, to give life, to guide and help bear fruit.

Through these “I am” sayings Jesus makes himself known in personal terms. These sayings are strong signs that point to Jesus as revealer.

If the absolute “I am” in the Fourth Gospel are expressions of God’s redemptive self-revelation in Jesus Christ, the “I am” with predicate nominative are explanations of different aspects of this self-revelation of God in Jesus Christ. The “I am” sayings point out that Jesus is the revealer in whom God utters himself. They show Jesus’ oneness with the Father. They are Christological affirmations from Jesus himself.

All these reveal a wide spectrum of the person and work of Jesus Christ. Jesus’ repeated teachings about his relationship to the Father and the “I am” statements as well as the signs lead up to the confession of Jesus as Lord and God. The list of Christological confessions are presented in such a manner that a climax is built in the confession of Thomas when Jesus’ deity is affirmed (20:28). It seems that the Christological confessions are deliberate creations of the fourth evangelist to serve his theological purpose, namely that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God and that by believing in him they may have life in his name (20:31). No single Christological confession is sufficient to comprehend the mystery of God revealed in Jesus Christ. The diverse confessions that point to the pre-existence, earthly ministry and the eschatological work of Jesus cumulatively portray Christ. Some of the titles are derived from the Hebrew Bible or inter-testamental literature or expectations. Some titles do not express his divinity, but some others involve an appreciation of Jesus that moves into the sphere of divinity, as expressed in the more exalted use of the title “Lord” and “God”. Of course

the “I am” Sayings point to his divinity as we see it in the background of the whole Bible.

End Notes: Abraham Philip, The History and Theology of the Gospel According to St. John (Tiruvalla: CSS, 1918), 58 2 J. H. Bernard, Bernard, J. H., John, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on John (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1928), cxvii.

1

(Poetic Meditations) (Continued from Page 11) Rev. Dr. M. J. Joseph, Kottayam 4. HE IS BURIED You did not ask for a burial Buria1 is our need For we want one more rite!

You did not ask us to embalm you But we want to smell our good deeds.

You preferred to be buried naked But it is our pride to be honoured in graves.

Lord, the pride of hypocrisy haunts me, Sins of self-congratulation torment me Forgive me, Lord!

5. HE HUMBLES HIMSELF Your weakness is my strength Your weakness makes me humble.

Your silence is my voice Your voice makes me silent.

You want me to reach out Your beyond is my destiny.

Lord your humility is not recorded with ink It is engraved in my heart.

6. HE IS LIFTED ON THE CROSS You were nailed And lifted on the cross.

You were lifted by your foes But you were lowered by your friends.

Did you move your head?

Did you speak to the thieves on your sides?

Yes, I moved my head to breathe my last But my last breath is the power of life.

Lord, in your pain, I saw a ray of hope In your death, you came down to my side.

7. NEARER TO THE CROSS Lord I want to be nearer to your cross But I am afraid.

I admire my brother, Joseph of Arimathea But I don't want to be known in his company.

I want Joseph to bury you I don't want to be a partner.

The powerful will hate me The ordinary will gossip about me Lord, what a fall in my Iife, Forgive me.

(Courtesy: ‘Beyond the Seen and the Unseen’ by Rev. Dr. M. J. Joseph, ISPCK (Delhi) and ECC, Bangalore, 2003)

15 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

In the Beginning God Created Prof. Dr. John P. Abraham, South Texas [It is the culture of most universities to look down on people of faith. Vocal atheistic scientists hold that God is not useful to the educated, and God only fills gaps that science has not yet explained. Yet, there is a silent majority of scientists and professors who believe in God and the creation account. Christianity is forbidden on many campuses, but atheism is not. Students begin to doubt some of the core beliefs of Christianity such as the existence of God, the creation account, age of the universe, Noah’s flood, Tower of Babel, Jonah, Angels, Miracles, Virgin Birth, bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ, and many other scriptural references. It may be that Christian students do not get a thorough enough understanding of the Bible and are easily persuaded to reject their Christian beliefs. As a professor of computer science, the author can easily spot errors in logic and has an in-depth education in cell biology and hematology with a sufficient background in chemistry and genetics to follow scientific arguments regarding evolution and creation. The author’s impending retirement after over 45 years of teaching prompted him to write this article.]

The Holy Bible is not a historical or scientific book, but it has abundant historical and scientific facts that can be tested. The purpose of the Holy Bible is to reveal the person of God to human beings. The Holy Bible is written for every generation and the vocabulary used in the Bible is non-scientific and that vocabulary existed before science emerged as a discipline, and readers should not expect latest precise scientific vocabulary. Among all His creation, humans are the only ones who can develop a meager understanding of the Creator. And nature itself reveals God the Creator, “the heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament shows his handiwork” (Ps 19:1). God revealed Himself to us through the person of Jesus Christ. His birth, crucifixion and resurrection are a matter of biblical and extra-biblical history.

Scientific research is based on repeated observations and experiments of how things happen. By that definition scientists can only perform research on repeatable events. Much of the events described in the Bible only happened once. Scientists create a hypothesis or null hypothesis and accept or reject it based on statistical significance. The most scientists can do is to produce a theory based on proving or disproving a hypothesis after repeated observations or experiments (theories are predictive of future observations or experiments). A theory can change as new evidence becomes available.

Scientists asserting theories as facts are violating scientific principles.

Scientists say that they follow ethical principles such that they do not falsify data to obtain statistical significance. An interesting question to ask here is, if there is no standard moral giver what would

be the ethics they follow?

For Christians God is the lawgiver and He sets moral standards and laws for the universe.

Research papers dealing with origin of life and selfgenerating cells are mostly wishful thinking and not founded on facts. Readers, particularly students, should question every statement that does not make sense according to accepted laws and principles of chemistry and physics. As the author reads articles about origin of life based on evolutionary principles, much of it does not make logical sense, and there are many gaps not explained. Computer generated graphics do not explain scientific facts. Why certain steps happened are not explained. Some scientists state that science cannot answer why something happens, only how. But if one has children and grandchildren as the author has, that is what they mostly ask, ‘why, why, why?’ Many atheistic scientists say that ‘why’ is not relevant and therefore should not be asked. What is the purpose of this universe? What is the purpose of one’s life? Is death of a person the end? These are the questions science cannot answer.

One of the well accepted fields of research is historical research. When an event cannot be repeated, one must rely on history or forensics.

Charles Darwin used observations or forensics to reconstruct his version of the past. While his observations were accurate, his reasoning and explanations were false. Historical research uses primary, secondary and tertiary sources as evidence with the former having greater significance. Primary evidences are personal remarks, oral traditions, eye-witness remarks, and archeological findings. Apostle John gave eye-witness accounts of Jesus’ existence, miracles, crucifixion and resurrection. There are biblical historians such as physician Luke and extra-biblical historians such as Lucian, Suetonius, Flavius Josephus, and Cornelius

16 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

Tacitus who connected Jesus to that period. Dr. Luke explains that he used eyewitness accounts, just as historical researchers use even today.

Yet, people question existence of historical Jesus while they do not question any of the other historical figures, for example, Socrates. There are much more contemporary writings about Jesus Christ than Socrates.

established by the Creator allow the universe to operate within its boundaries and create conditions for life to exist on this earth. These laws of nature are responsible for day and night, summer and winter, drought and flood, mountains and valleys, wellness and sickness, birth and death, and all that the universe provides. Many ignorantly blame God for the natural calamities.

If no portions of the Bible can be disproven, all of it should be accepted, including Jonah in a large fish. More and more archeological discoveries are authenticating facts mentioned in the bible. Physicists now uniformly accept that there was a beginning of time and of the universe. How did the writer of Genesis know that 5000 years ago? Or how did writer of the Book of Job know darkness is not the absence of light and it occupies space? That book is older than Genesis. Now scientists say that 95% of the universe is dark matter (27%) and dark energy (68%). Book of Job says that the earth is hung in an empty space, “He stretches out the north over the void and hangs the earth on nothing.” It also describes some land and water creatures that are no longer around. In 700 BC Isaiah wrote “It is he who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers; who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them like a tent to dwell in.” At the time of this writing no one had gone high enough to see human beings like grasshoppers and no one knew that the earth was round. Nor did anyone know about the space and that the universe was expanding. Isaiah explained these scientific facts with the limited vocabulary that existed at the time. It was only in late 1920s Hubble postulated the expanding universe. Only in the 1980s John Corliss discovered existence of hydrothermal vents, but the book of Job mentioned it over 5000 years ago, “Have you entered into the springs of the sea, or walked in the recesses of the deep?”

Time and space are so integrated, one cannot exist without the other. Einstein added other dimensions to it and called it space-time. In space, one can move from place to place at will; but one cannot move in time at will.

Since God is outside of time (as He created it), He can see the entire span of time and He knows one’s future along with the past and present. Predestination theology should be carefully studied considering God’s foreknowledge. One chooses to love or avoid individuals based on their past actions. What if one was able to travel to the future and see actions of individuals and comeback to present, one could form opinions on those observed. The author is particularly referring to the biblical reference of God loved Jacob and hated Esau (Malachi 1:3). Atheists accuse God of being vengeful and partial and thus He cannot be God.

In the beginning The Holy Bible begins with the phrase “In the beginning” which refers to the beginning of time or as far back as time can be traced. Before the beginning of time only God existed; He is the agent that brought time into existence, see Gen 1:1, John 1:1 and Jude 1:25.

Scientists say time cannot exist without space, energy, gravity, and motion. Thus, an event that brought space, matter and energy into existence started the time. Those who believe in the authority and veracity of the Holy Bible call that event the creation. They also believe that at the time of creation God also established the laws of nature.

The laws of Physics and time are fixed, and established by the Lord says Jeremiah 33:25, “This is what the LORD says: If I have not made my covenant with day and night and established the laws of heaven and earth”.

Through repeated observations, physics has developed several mathematical formulas that govern physical laws.

One can deduce that this fine-tuned laws of nature

Time is the most difficult concept to comprehend. Time can be measured but cannot be described. Only the present is real, future can be predicted, and past can be reconstructed using laws of physics. One can make a choice about the future, but nothing can be done about the past. There are recordings of the past in writings or records kept by the universe itself. Earth has fossil records, and trees keeps time by growth circles. These recordings should be interpreted carefully, as fossils can be deposited in a short span of time but will appear as long periods of time. And there are inherent errors associated with carbon dating. However, when different readings yield similar results, chances are those readings are correct. The time can vary depending on velocity and gravity. So, time at the beginning of creation could have been much faster than it is now as the galaxies have moved a great deal.

The scripture did not intent for us to know the age of the universe, just that it had a beginning. Moses who wrote Genesis also wrote Psalms 90. About time Moses says, “A thousand years in your sight are like a day that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night.” Thousand is the largest digit used by Mosses in all his writings. So, it may mean a big number. After denying a beginning of the universe for centuries (scientists of old believed in a perpetual universe), now scientists uniformly accept that it had a beginning. Scientists can predict the beginning of time by measuring by how long light took to reach the telescopes and by measuring other electromagnetic radiation from the earliest event that they refer to as Big Bang. Age of the universe has nothing to do with salvation of human race, and thus, the author is not going to make a stand on the age of the universe.

17 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

These words ‘In the beginning’ is used twice in the Bible, in Genesis 1 and in Gospel of John 1; the former to introduce creation of the universe and later to affirm that God and Christ existed before creation (John 17:5,24).

Other scripture references to creation exist in Job, Romans, Psalms, proverbs, Isiah, Ecclesiastes and other books.

consciousness. Many Christians including the author have experienced God in a very personal way and may very well know someone else who had a personal experience with God. Science does not leave any room for such experiences.

Fulfilled prophecies such as historical prophecies of Daniel affirm God’s interaction with man.

God

Atheists do not accept the existence of God nor see any reason to acknowledge God, but they go out of their way to convince others that there is no God. If they truly believe that there is no God, why make such a fuss about Him? Atheists only explain created works of God and laws of nature. Atheists often use science and evolution to argue against God. Theory of evolution is now taught to students as a fact, which is a total hoax. Charles Darwin wrote down the observations and similarities between species.

Bible uses ‘kind’ to differentiate families.

That word existed long before the word ‘species’ was coined. Atheists often iterate that ‘kind’ should not be used.

Genesis 1:1 does not attempt to clarify existence of God; it merely asserts the eternal authority and power of God. GOD is eternal, omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent.

Two uniqueness revealed about God are that He is Holy, Holy, Holy (either indicating Trinity or highest form of Holiness) and He is merciful. God expresses emotions just as human beings, but His love supersedes all other emotions and therefore God is love. Creation itself is an act of love. Genesis 1 uses Elohim to refer to God who is the God of all creation, and Genesis 2 uses ElohimYHWH, the revealed name of God to Israel. The personal name of God, YHWH, is forbidden to be pronounced, and Jewish people refer to the name using the term Hashem (The Name). The word ‘LORD” is commonly used, to show the relationship between man and YHWH. There are many other names used to refer to God. God revealed himself to humanity in the person of Christ, see John 1:1 and John 17:5, 24. One notable fact about Jesus Christ is that the chance (probability) for all the prophecies to be fulfilled by one man is about 1 in octillion; only God can do that. Christ gave us a new commandment, which is to love one another. Christianity is the only religion in which by birth a person does not become a Christian; each person must accept Christ as the personal savior. Christians believe that God is a person and gets involved personally in the affairs of those who seek His help. Book of Jonah is a testament to God’s love to all humanity. Christianity views every human being as a person created in God’s image and loved by God, including atheists and agnostics and people belonging to all religions. Every person created in the image of God can naturally behave morally regardless of religion or beliefs, unless one specifically chooses otherwise. Many religions attempt to comprehend God through observing and worshiping the creation rather than the creator. God’s nature is explained fully by the combined teachings of Moses and Jesus Christ. When one earnestly seeks the person of God through the scriptures or prayers, ultimately one will find Jesus Christ. A very good place to start reading is the Gospel According to John.

The creation cannot comprehend or explain the Creator.

A computer can’t explain man who created it, but the man who created the computer can explain the computer. Man cannot fully comprehend God, other than what He has revealed to us. Science cannot analyze God any more than they can analyze love, mind, or

Atheism has undergone the most elaborate human experimentation under communism in Russia and the results are in. It is a total failure. Russia was under the 70-year atheistic communist rule when it totally collapsed. Two thirds of the population did not believe in the existence of God. During the author’s 1998 visit to Russia, he personally witnessed the results of atheism.

Once a mighty empire was reduced to hopelessness and poverty. A religious revival is happening in Russia today.

The author warns young students not to fall under the authority and control of atheistic professors. Atheism is an easy way out of moral living, not that atheists can’t live a decent life, but without a moral law giver there is no morality.

Atheists consider miracles as violations of laws of the universe and thus cannot occur. Christians refute this argument as God is not limited to this realm. The very reason Christians recognize a miracle is because it is out of the ordinary.

Examples are the Immaculate Conception and the bodily resurrection of Jesus. Christ’s life on this earth was filled with miracles. There are many who receive miraculous healing, immediate relief from drug addiction, and other unexplainable miracles.

Created Creation is the work of bringing something into existence.

Two different words are used in Genesis, created (bara) and made (asah), and some bible scholars try to explain bara means to bring something into existence from nothing and asah means to make something out of existing substance. According to this interpretation, God created the heavens and earth, sea creatures and birds, and man; everything else was made. Man was both made and created: Adam was first made out of dust and then created when soul was placed into him.

18 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

A creator will have some ultimate goal and the creator goes through a series of steps to achieve that goal. The creation explained in Genesis had an ultimate goal: creation of man in His own image. All creation leading up to the creation of man were the steps needed to achieve this ultimate goal. Each step is joined with the previous one, “And God said.”

Similarities in creation only emphasizes one creator, rather than one creation becoming another in time. God did not create everything in one instant, the creation was in stages. Anyone who built a simple structure like a house knows that the sequence of steps needs to be followed and relatively small time gaps are given to stabilize and integrate each step. Long period of time is an enemy for creation, not a friend as atheists assert. The author has seen houses not completed in a reasonable time had to be rebuilt as deterioration had taken place. The author’s experience in his organic chemistry classes where he had to synthesize some chemicals was that time, temperature, and orders of steps were absolutely important. He could not have produced an intermediate chemical and come back after a few years and expect to continue the experiment. This is the ridiculous theory Evolutionists propose.

The creation occurred in six stages (scripture calls it 6 days) and then God rested and did no more creation.

When the creation was completed (ultimately man was created in His image), He saw that it was very good.

Until then He saw it as good. There is a sudden appearance of major animal phyla without evidence of any precursors; science calls it the Cambrian Explosion.

The author simply accepts that all those creatures were created by God at the same time. Archeology can show lots of genus and families (‘kind’) until Man arrived on this earth. Then, no new families show up, confirming Biblical sequence of creation.

If evolution is happening there should be new genera of animals (not species) evolved since the appearance of man.

Evolution is what is taught in schools as a scientific fact, it is no longer taught as an alternative to creation. Those scientists who question evolution are alienated by their colleagues, peer review teams, journals, and news media.

Theistic evolutionists only embolden the atheistic evolutionists. Genes can rearrange, or genes can be deleted, in order to adapt and make a new species of the same genus. Micro-evolution is possible in laboratories.

However, there is absolutely no evidence for evolution creating a new family (‘kind’) of animals. Evolutionists will point to similarities in morphology of animals and commonality of 2 percent of genes between animals and human. The author can speak authoritatively about computer science. Creation of a computer program takes considerable sequences of steps. The author has written many lengthy programs, one with around 60,000 lines of code. Certain portions of programs are used repeatedly to reduce the total number of lines of code.

Each segment of code had dependency on previously

written code. As someone in the future examine different programs that the author wrote and notice repeated code segments in all those programs, should that person then conclude one program morphed into another program by chance or a common programmer wrote all those programs? If portions of the program are deleted, the remaining program may work until that portion of the code is required, say data validation. If random changes are made to the program, the original program becomes totally unusable. Mutation happening in a male and female during one lifespan and within a geographic proximity to produce offspring of the new mutated animal is highly improbable. It is time to study evolution as a theory and teach alternatives to our students.

In the early 1970s the author cultured blood lymphocytes and during the metaphase stage added colchicine to arrest mitosis, and burst the cell using alcohol which splattered the chromosomes on a slide.

Then the specimen was stained to take pictures of the chromosomes, and the pictures were used for karyotyping. The main purpose was to identify the XY chromosomes to identify true genetic gender of the newborn. The author did this as contract work for some doctors who were working with pediatricians. The author even had own darkroom and printed all the photographs.

Thus, he developed a special interest in genomics. It was just few years after Watson and Crick received Nobel Prize in 1962 for discovering the double helix structure of DNA. DNA is found in the nucleus and small amount of circular DNA in the mitochondria of a cell. Mitochondrial DNA is passed exclusively by the mother and genes in Y chromosomes are passed by the father. Geneticists can now trace all men to a single male (Adam) and single female (Eve). Atheists would say there were other males and females lived at that time but only genetic Adam and Eve were fortunate to pass on their genes. Nevertheless, the book of Genesis says there was a single man and a single woman created by God. There are 23 pairs of chromosomes, 23 inherited from father and the other 23 from the mother. When gene from one chromosome from the father is not expressed, the gene from the mother will take over. This is why men are more prone to have certain genetic disorders as men only have one X chromosome. The other X chromosome is not there to cover for recessive genes. There are some 3 billion base pairs in the chromosomes that make up human genome, holding enormous amount of information, much more than all the encyclopedias combined. Only 2% (around 20,000) of the human base pairs found on the chromosomes are protein coding genes, and that number keeps changing. These protein coding genes are same in many animals that need to produce protein for survival and procreation. Production of protein from the instructions found in DNA in itself is highly sophisticated and interdependent with RNA, ribosomes, nucleic acids and so on. The control mechanisms reside elsewhere in the DNA. This, in a very small way, is similar to the

19 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

control unit in a CPU within a computer that fetches, decodes, executes and pipelines instructions. If the readers are not convinced that computers came into existence by accident, there is no way anyone can believe that the DNA with all the information it carries contained within a 5 to 10 microns (7 cells can fit on a human hair tip) came into existence randomly. Mutation is detrimental for a cell rather than beneficial as evolutionists believe. Scientists do not know the purpose for the rest 98% base pairs in DNA and they call it junk DNA. Someday the purpose will be discovered just as the dark matter and energy discussed above. These 98% perhaps gives human the uniqueness of God’s creation.

The Heavens and earth ‘Heavens and earth’ is used to mean this earth and everything above it, meaning the universe. Experts in Hebrew say that the vocabulary in Hebrew is very limited, about one-hundredth of English words. In English more precise words can be used, whereas in Hebrew the meaning of a word depends on the whole sentence and sometimes sentences leading up to the current sentence or the following sentences. An example is the word ‘day’ (yom) that could mean few hours, full day, or a period of time (long time).

Since the creation account continues to talk about creation of plants, fish and birds, land animals and human, it can be assumed that Gen 1:1 is referring to all material things (atoms, elements, and compounds) that make up earth and water.

God created all the naturally occurring 90 elements on day one. Atoms that make up these elements are aweinspiring. Science has gone through several versions of the model of atoms, most popular being the Bohr model, where each atom appears like a mini solar system with nucleus in the center and electrons in orbits. This model was modified to make the orbits elliptical. It was further modified to show electrons enclosed in envelops. The positively charged protons should repel each other and a force greater than their repulsion keeps them together in the nucleus, only made possible by the Creator. Chain reactions of nuclear fission or fusion can release enormous amount of energy, so much energy compacted into these atoms. God has placed order and beauty in all His creation from an atom to a giant star. The order found in the elements allows us to create a periodic table.

Every element is used by human being for one purpose or the other. Atheism teaches that radiation from the Big Bang created quarks and baryons that combined to make nuclei (nucleosynthesis) and helium lithium and beryllium were produced after 300,000 years when cooling took place. All other atoms were derived from these by fusion.

It is incomprehensible how reasonable humans can accept this theory. Every element that scientists created in the lab is highly unstable that they can only exist for very short time.

Summary Apostle John states that Jesus Christ has always been with God the Father, and that all things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. Over twelve hundred years ago Moses wrote that the universe and the time had a beginning; science only now confirms that the universe had a beginning. The writer of the book of Job gave some insight into creation, water cycles, and many living creatures that are extinct.

The Holly Bible alludes that universe is expanding, and the earth is round and is hung in the space, and even gave a hint of the dark matter. All material things were created first along with the physical laws to sustain the creation. Then all living things, plants and animals, were created, and finally the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man (Adam) became a living soul. Eve was formed out of the man. Genomic research now traces human ancestry to a single male and female, Adam and Eve. According to the scripture all men have sinned and fell short of glory of God. As explained in the foregoing text, God is merciful and full of love, and He loved His creation so much that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. This article argued for the creation account of in the Bible giving scientific rationale as needed and argued against macro evolution. This article pointed out the strong evidence for creation and against evolution is the Cambrian explosion. The evolutionists adhere to the false narrative that anything can happen given enough time, and the author strongly argued that time and mutation work against evolution. The article further argued against atheists about whom the scripture says that the fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” The author is a tenured full professor of 45 years at a major university in South Texas with an enrollment of 28,000 students where he held various teaching and administrative positions. He encounters many students from Christian background leaving their faith as they matriculate.

Atheists use science as a tool to argue against belief in God. Atheists consider themselves sophisticated, and label theists as superstitious and unsophisticated. As college students want to be sophisticated and non-superstitious, many turn away from God during their college years. It is sad that some scientists feel that God is incompatible with science. Bible encourages people to study the works of the Lord, “Great are the works of the LORD, studied by all who delight in them.” Humans are encouraged to study animals, birds, plants and the fish, as it is written, “But ask the beasts, and they will teach you; the birds of the heavens, they will tell you; or the bushes of the earth, they will teach you; and the fish of the sea will declare to you.”

20 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

Who was Jesus? And who is Jesus for us Today?

Dr. Zac Varghese, London Human beings have been occupied with the question of the nature of the being of Jesus Christ for over two thousand years.

Questions about Jesus' identity and his role as ‘The Jewish Messiah’ had created much confusion and arguments for the second temple Jewish community and also for many biblical scholars of the 'historical Jesus' research including: Reimarus, Strauss, Schweitzer, Barth, Bultmann, Tom Wright and many others over the last three hundred years. Messiah, Christ, anointed king, warrior king, servant king, Immanuel, the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, eschatology, Parousia and all such words carry different meanings and expectations for different people; in postmodern thinking words have no reference point, meanings continually shift.

In the New Testament, we are given such key information as what the name of Messiah would be and why (Matt. 1:21), where He would be born in fulfilment of various OT prophecies (Mic 5:2; Mt 2:6), and how both His birth-mother and His adopted-father are part of God’s plan for healing the fractured world (Mt 1:16). A few words are clearly not enough to describe Jesus’ miraculous birth and its implications. His birth narratives and genealogies are only found in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. In Micah, we were told that He would be born in Bethlehem (5:2). In Isaiah, we read that His mother would be a virgin (7:14), and that He is coming to save people from their sins (ch.53). Messianic age was a God-given hope for the people of the second temple Judaism because of the subjugation of the Jewish people by foreign powers, and as indicated by Isiah’s prophecies and in Isaiah’s songs (Is 42:1-9; 49;1-13; 50: 4-11; 52:13-53-12). As early as on the eighth day when Jesus’ parents took baby Jesus to the temple for the circumcision, Simeon and Anna recognised the prophetic fulfilment in Jesus (Lk 2: 21ff).

John the Baptist, Mary – the mother of Jesus – and Joseph were well-placed than anyone else of that age to realise the identity of Jesus and the importance of his God-given mission; yet, John, from his prison, sent two of his disciples and enquired: “Are you the one who was to come, or should we expect someone else?” This question is recoded both in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke (Mt 11:2-9; Lk 7:19-28). John was imprisoned by Herod for his adulterous liaison with Herodias – his brother, Philip’s, wife – whom he had married (Mk 6:17ff).

John even knew the identity of Jesus when he was in his mother’s womb and much more clearly and dramatically when he baptised Jesus at the river Jordan (Mt 3:3ff). Therefore, it is not easy to discern John’s doubt and read his mind two thousand years after the incidence. It is just possible that Jesus did not fulfil John’s expectations regarding a Messiah, a warrior king, which John and the Jewish people entertained. John had gone through much suffering under Herod, his faith and aspirations were being deeply tested in Herod’s dungeon.

Therefore, it was just possible for John to ponder: “Why I am I imprisoned for standing up for morality and a just cause?”

“Where is the judgement that Christ promised to render upon evil men?” (cf. Mt 3:10). John’s enquiry was sincere; having doubt is not a sign of weakness; it could even be a positive factor for growth. We read of the exclamation of the father of a

boy with the evil spirit: “I do believe; help me to overcome my unbelief!” (Mk 9:24). It is also possible that John may be reminding Jesus that he completed his destiny, had prepared the path for Jesus, he had done his bit, and it is now up to Jesus to carry it on and establish the kingdom of God, if he were to be the Messiah. Jesus had very high regard for John’s work, his lifestyle and said, “Among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist.” Jesus considered John’s work as the launching pad for his own ministry. In response to John’s enquiry Jesus sent a coded message to John, asking John to compare his work with what the scriptures had prophesied (Mt 11:4-6; Is 35:5-6; Is 61; Lk 4: 8-19; Dan 7:13, 14).

We see three dimensions of Jesus’ identity in St. John’s Gospel.

His prologue is an amazing piece of writing with deeper insight to the identity of Jesus. John’s Christology touches three areas of great importance: 1 The pre-existence of Christ before his becoming man and his integral role in the creation of the cosmos; 2) The incarnation of Christ as Jesus of Nazareth, as Mary and Joseph’s son, and his preaching and healing on earth until his death; 3) Resurrection, ascension and the continued working of Christ until now and beyond, the ages to come. The divinity and humanity of Jesus to reveal the human face of God is one of the purposes of his incarnation, which is clearly stated in the final verse of the prologue: “No-one has ever seen God, but God the One and only One, who is at the Father’s side, has made him known” (Jn 1:18). This verse serves both as the conclusion to the Prologue and as an introduction to Jesus’ ministry. John juxtaposes the eternal, supra-temporal realm of God, with the historical realm that encompasses the everyday affairs of human beings, mere creatures of flesh and blood. In so doing, John lays the foundation for the development of the "realized eschatology."

Jesus was also keen to know how others thought about him and his ministry and therefore, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say the son of man is?”(Mt 16:13ff). He then asked more directly to his disciples, “Who do you say I am?” To this Peter enthusiastically replied: “You are Christ, the son of the living God.” This question is also directed to us today and every day in our lives. In our agonising and unavoidable struggles, it is important to realise who Jesus Christ is in our personal existence. Although archaeological search and findings are helpful in refuting the claims of some modern theologians, their studies on the historical Jesus and their negative arguments; some of them vehemently argue that Gospel had got it all wrong; Jesus was not after all what he had been made out to be by the Church. According to the Jesus Seminar Group, a controversial scholarly forum established in the United States in the Eighties, Jesus was a mortal man born of two human parents, who did not perform nature miracles nor die as a substitute for sinners nor rise bodily from the dead. But Dominic 1

1https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2017/12/jesus-

tomb-archaeology/?cmpid=org=ngp::mc=crmemail::src=ngp::cmp=editorial::add=History_20191223&rid=51A E5DF110CF3BA61043F7710D654053

21 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

Crossman , the co-chairman of the group, admits that the radical sceptics go too far: “. . . Granted stories of Christ’s miraculous deeds— healing the sick with his words, feeding a multitude with a few morsels of bread and fish, even restoring life to a corpse four days dead—are hard for modern minds to embrace. But that’s no reason to conclude that Jesus of Nazareth was a religious fable.”

2

Tom wright in his chapter on ‘The stone the builders rejected’ had the following to say about Jesus’s identity and mission based on what Jesus said (Mt 11:25ff). “Whether or not that is correct, the chapter [Ch11] reverts to the larger question of Jesus’ identity and mission. Jesus prays with thanks that the Father ‘has hidden these things’ from the wise and understanding and has been revealed them to babies; and he declares that within the new world that he is launching there is a new mode of knowing, in which the Father himself enables people to ‘know the son’, and the son himself enables people to know the Father. Jesus’ answer to John, then, is about discerning the dawn, recognising the new creation in the midst of the old: about the way in which people are now enable to look at the events in the present world, the world of space, time and matter, and to see in them the light of the dawning day.”

Epistle to the Hebrews is comforting in these troubled times: “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever” (Heb13:8).

3

Jesus identity is very clearly described by Jesus himself in the seven “I am” statements recorded in St. John’s Gospel. They are metaphors, hidden with deep spiritual meaning, which Jesus uses to draw out imagery that describes the implications of His identity. Jesus’ beloved disciple, John, describes Jesus’s description of himself in the following way: “I am the bread of life” (6:35); “the light of the world” (8:12); “the gate” (10:9); “the good shepherd” (10:11); “the resurrection and the life” (11:25, 26); “the way and the truth and the life” (14: 6); and “the vine” (15:5). These are encouraging signposts for our pilgrimage with Jesus Christ.

Finally, writings about Jesus, in these troubled times, must exercise restraint lest enthusiasm for Jesus and his preaching permeates all that one should hold sacred should lead to what critical scholars may deem extravagant statements and claims.

However, one should be able, without irritation or hesitance, to assess hostile appraisal on Jesus’ life and ministry. We must not forget that the test of our faith in Jesus is to be found in our own experience of Jesus in our lives and our pilgrimage with him.

This is very clearly brought out in the experience of both the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:25-26) and Martha when Jesus comforted her at the death of Lazarus (Jn 11:27). It is not the High Priest, Rabbis, scribes, teachers of the Law or Pharisees who realised who Jesus was, but it was simple women in their encounter with Jesus at the sharp end of their lives. Therefore, each one of us needs to have an experiential understanding of Jesus. More than the archaeology, other artefacts and historical research we need to know who Jesus Christ is for us today in our lives and in our situation, and furthermore, what God requires of us here and now. Whatever is our understanding of Jesus, the assertion of the writer of the

2

Crossan, John Dominic (2001). 'Excavating Jesus: Beneath the Stones, Behind the Texts', with Jonathan L. Reed. Harper Collins. ISBN 0-06-061634-2.

3 N. T. Wright, ‘History and Eschatology’, Baylor University,

Press, Waco, Texas, 2019, p180.

FOCUS The Editorial Board of the FOCUS has decided to introduce a new initiative of ‘Ask FOCUS' to enable its readers and well wishers to interact with issuesspecificity with FOCUS about the biblical and theological themes addressed in this journal. We request your active participation in this new interactive feature focused especially, though not exclusively, on the youth.

You could begin with sending us your thoughts and queries about the themes and insights offered through the FOCUS issues. It would help if you would be brief and limit your queries to, ideally, about 50 to 100 words. We are, however, somewhat flexible about the word limit.

Even so, brevity is the envisaged golden rule. You may send your thoughts by e-mail to Rev. Valson Thampu (you could address him as Valson) at his e-mail address vthampu@gmail.com The editorial board reserves the freedom to edit the submissions and also to reject any which is contrary to the editorial policies and mission of FOCUS. You may access all the previous issues of FOCUS online magazine by visiting any of the two web sites below and reading the thematic articles in each issue.

We guarantee that your privacy will be protected and that your name will be published only with your prior permission; otherwise, your views/statement will be published under the caption: A Reader’s View. We hope that our readers and well-wishers would make use of this new initiative and take part actively in the mission and purpose of FOCUS.

www.issuu.com/diasporafocus www.scribd.com/diasporafocus

22 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

Who Is Jesus?

Lal Varghese, Esq., Dallas It is relevant to ask oneself and the world around us this very sensitive question, who is Jesus? It is especially important in an age where the existence of God and the truth of the Bible are being questioned more than ever. People who do not believe in the Bible are often claiming that the Bible is filled with errors, especially regarding the historical Jesus. Atheists have faith issues with the birth, the life, the death and the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Christians are persecuted in many countries and churches are burned, while Christians find it difficult to defend their faith. While faithful believers are building and rebuilding churches and institutions founded in the name of Jesus Christ, but their actions or deeds do not reflect their faith or belief in Jesus Christ. Therefore, let us look at why Jesus asked the question: “Who do you say I am?" as recorded in Matthew 11:15.

Jesus lived between c. 4 BC – c. AD 30/33, also referred to as Jesus of Nazareth or Jesus Christ. He was a firstcentury Jewish preacher. He is the central figure of Christianity, which was formed after his death and resurrection.

Most Christians believe he is the incarnation of God, the Son of God and the awaited Messiah (the Christ), as prophesied in the Old Testament. Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed historically, although the quest for the historical Jesus has produced little agreement on the historical reliability of the Gospels and on how closely the Jesus portrayed in the Bible reflects the historical Jesus.

Jesus was a Galilean Jew who was baptized by John the Baptist and began his ministry. He preached and was often referred to as a "rabbi". Jesus debated with fellow Jews on how best to follow the one and only God; He engaged in healings, taught in parables and gathered followers. He was arrested and tried by the Jewish authorities, turned over to the Roman government, and crucified on the order of Pontius Pilate, the Roman prefect. After His death, His followers believed He rose from the dead, and the community they formed eventually became the early Church and known as Christianity.

"The famous historian H. G. Wells, who was not a Christian believer, remarked, "I must confess as a historian that this penniless preacher from Nazareth is irrevocably the very center of history. Jesus Christ is easily the most dominant figure in all history." Wells’ observation about Jesus has general acceptance of many; the debate starts when Jesus' real identity is the subject: Who was He really? Was He a mere man? Was He a notable prophet? Was He an outstanding teacher? Was He a healer? Or was He much more than that? Was He divine? Was He "the only begotten Son of God?" And what meaning should His life have to anyone? Does He truly matter today?

The proposed question, "Who is Jesus?" strongly suggests that He is still living, that He exists now in our own lifetimes, that His life still influences millions of people around the

world. Is that possible? Or is this proposal merely the hope of unintelligent, under-educated religionists? Does this question, "Who is Jesus?" have any relevance in today's society? If so to what extent?

Let us begin the inquiry ‘Who was Jesus?’ based on the gospel of St. Luke. Angel Gabriel predicted to Mary the birth of Jesus in a town in Galilee called Nazareth; Mary was a virgin, a village girl, who was betrothed to Joseph, a carpenter. Mary replied to Gabriel: ‘I am the Lord’s servant.

May it be done to me as you have said” (Lk 1:38). This is how the birth of Jesus is recorded in the Gospels. The baby was born; the Messiah himself came forth from heaven through his mother’s womb. That night, an angel appeared to some shepherds and declared, “Fear not, for behold, I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people.” (Lk 2: 10). Rejoice! The King has come, and with this baby, fullness of joy was born for all who would believe.

Jesus’s message remained the same, “Rejoice.” “Blessed are you when people hate you and when they exclude you and revile you and spurn your name as evil, on account of the Son of Man! Rejoice in that day, and leap for joy, for behold, your reward is great in heaven.” (Lk 6: 22-23.

Jesus had good part of his ministry in Capernaum and walked by the Sea of Galilee. He asked two fishermen, Simon Peter and his brother Andrew: “Come, follow me . . . and I will send you out to fish for people”, which they did without any hesitation. Jesus called James and his brother John while they were in a boat with their father Zebedee and they immediately left the boat and their father and followed him. During the 40 days in the wilderness, when Jesus was tempted by the devil, he replied: ‘Man must not live on bread alone . . . and worship your Lord your God and serve him only.’

He healed a man with leprosy and another one who was paralyzed. He told the man cleansed from leprosy to offer himself as a testimony to the Lord. He told the paralytic man that he has forgiven his sins. The scribes and Pharisees were skeptical about his reply to the paralytic man and questioned his authority to forgive sins. He told them that the son of man has authority to forgive sins; he declares for the first time as Son of God, being born as son of man has the authority from his Father to forgive the sins.

When Jesus asked Levi, a tax collector, to follow him, he hosted a dinner for Jesus and invited other tax collectors and other guests; the Pharisees again questioned him about eating with tax collectors and sinners. He told them, it is not the healthy who needs a doctor, but the sick and He came to redeem the sinners and not to call the righteous. Again, when the Pharisees complained that his disciples do not fast and pray, but only eat and drink, Jesus replied to them, there is a time come when you need to fast and pray but not when the bridegroom is with them. He also told them that no-one tears a patch from a new garment and sews it on an old one,

23 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

since new garment will not match the old one. Similarly new wine is not put into old wineskins because old wine will burst the skins, it will spill and ruin the skins also.

When his disciples picked up the heads of grains while walking through the grain filed, the Pharisees again questioned him that his disciples are doing something prohibited on the Sabbath. He replied to them that ‘Son of man is the Lord of Sabbath.’ When at the Synagogue, he saw the man with shriveled hand; he asked him to stretch out his hand and healed. Pharisees again questioned him for healing on a Sabbath day, but he told them ‘Is it lawful to do good on Sabbath or do evil, to save life or to destroy it?’

Jesus selected twelve Apostles, went on with his mission of healing and preaching in towns and villages. He preached and taught people to love their enemies, do not judge others, like a tree is known by its fruit, a good person produces good out of the good stored up in his heart while an evil person speaks evil from the evil things stored up in his heart.

When Jesus healed the daughter of the Centurion, he told Jesus that he is not even worthy for Jesus to come to his house and also he is not even worthy to come to Jesus. The Centurion requested Jesus to say only a word so that his daughter will be healed. Jesus told the crowd: ‘I have not seen this much faith even in Israel.’ When Jesus went to the town of Nain, he saw a dead man being carried in a coffin, who was the only son of a widow. He told the widow ‘do not weep’ and touched the coffin and asked the young man ‘to get up.’ The dead man sat up and began to speak and the crowd that followed him was amazed and said: ‘a great prophet has risen among us and God has visited us.’

When John the Baptist’s disciples told John about what they heard and seen what Jesus was doing, John sent two of his disciples to Jesus to ask him ‘are you the Messiah who is to come?’(Lk7:18ff). Jesus asked John’s disciples to go back and report what Jesus was doing for the blind and others with various kinds of needs. Jesus praised John what he is doing and proclaimed the he is the one who was sent ahead to prepare the way for the Son of Man. Jesus compared the generation of his time like those people sitting in the marketplace and calling to each other. When he commissioned the twelve instructed them not to take staff, bag, money, bread or extra shirt. He told them to stay whatever house they enter and stay until they leave. If anyone does not welcome them, shake off the dust from the feet as a testimony against them.

At Caesarea Philippi, Jesus asked his disciples: ‘Who do you say that I am?’ (Lk 16:15). Then Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the son of the living God.” He warned that the Son of Man would suffer many things, will be rejected, killed and raised on the third day. He told them to deny oneself and take up his cross and follow him and whoever wants to save his life will lose it and whoever loses his life because of him will save it.

He said, those are the people who are blessed who hear his words and keep it. He said, this generation asks for sign

since they are an evil generation. ‘As Jonah was a sign to the Ninevites, so also will be the Son of Man to this generation.’

He said lamp is the light of the body and when it is put on lamp stand, it will shine the whole room. He scolded the Pharisees by saying that they like cups cleaned outside but inside with full of greed and evil. He compared them to unmarked graves over which people walk without knowing the existence of the grave.

He warned about the hypocrisy of the Pharisees and warned that nothing covered won’t be uncovered; nothing hidden won’t be made known. He wanted them to fear the one who has authority to throw them in to hell. He asked the people to acknowledge the Son of man who will acknowledge them before the God. He promised that whenever you are brought before synagogues, rulers and authorities, no need to worry about what to say, but the Holy Spirit will teach you what to say.

He criticized those who stores treasures for themselves and not rich toward God. He preached that there is no space for anxiety in our lives. If we seek his kingdom, everything will be provided to us. He warned to be ready for the master’s return with lamps lit. Everyone who has been given much, much will be required of them. He also warned that He came not for peace but division. He told the hypocrites that they know how to interpret the appearance of the earth, and asked them, ‘how is that they do not know to interpret the present time?’

He wanted people to settle with their opponents and warned that unless they repent, they will perish. He told the example of the fig tree which does not bear fruits, but allowed to grow for one more year to see if it bears fruit and expected everyone to bear fruits. While at the synagogue, He healed the woman, who was disabled by a spirit for 18 years. He replied to the leader of the synagogue, who was indignant for Jesus curing her on Sabbath day, that there is noting wrong in freeing the women from the bondage of the Satan on the Sabbath day.

When His mother and brothers were looking for Him, Jesus told them: “Here are my mother and my brothers. For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.” He preached using parables, the parable of the mustard tree and of the heaven. He warned that it would be difficult for the rich man to enter the kingdom of God. He wanted people to enter through the narrow way and those who are last will be first and those who are first will be last.

Jesus was angry with Herod Antipas and called him a fox, who wanted to kill him and told that it is not possible for a prophet to perish outside of Jerusalem (Lk 13: 33). Jesus lamented over Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones who are sent to her and said ‘blessed is who come in the name of the Lord.’

Jesus taught us the lessons of humility and said when you are invited for a wedding, do not recline at the best place, but proceed to the lowest place. When we are hosting a

24 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

lunch or dinner do not invite your friends, relatives, brothers or sisters or rich neighbors, since they may invite you back and hence repay; but invite the poor, the maimed, the lame or the blind, since they cannot repay you; but you will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous.

Jesus told us the cost of discipleship and ‘whoever does not bear his own cross and come after me cannot be my disciple.’ Through the parables of lost coin, lost sheep and lost son, Jesus said: ‘there will be much joy in heaven when one sinner repents than the righteous people.’Through the parable of the dishonest manager, Jesus told that we couldn’t serve two masters and also serve both God and money. Jesus taught the kingdom values and said, ‘the law and prophets were until John, since then good news of the kingdom has been proclaimed and everyone is invited to enter it.’

By the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, Jesus taught us that whoever tries to make his life secure will lose it, but whoever loses his life will preserve it. Through the parable of the persistent widow, Jesus taught that God would swiftly grant justice to those who cry out to him continuously.

Through the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector went for praying, Jesus taught that: ‘whoever exalts himself will be humbled, but one who humbles himself will be exalted.’ Jesus told the rich young ruler that no one is good, except God alone and reminded him of the commandments: ‘Do not commit adultery, do not murder, do not steal, do not bear false witness, honor your father and mother.’ He also told the rich young man to sell all he has and distribute to the poor and then to follow him so that he can have treasure in heaven.’

He warned the scribes of their practices: they enjoyed to go in long robes, love greetings in the market place and best place in the synagogues and the best seats in the banquets, but they devoured widows’ houses and said long prayers for show: He warned that they will receive harsher judgment.

Jesus predicted the signs of the end of the age and destruction of Jerusalem. He said, everyone would hate those who believe in Him, but by your endurance you will gain your lives. He said, at the end the Son of Man will come with great power and glory. He said heaven and earth will pass away, but His words will never pass away.

Jesus told the need for being watchful since the day of end will come unexpectedly and be in prayer so that we may have strength to escape all these things and to stand before the Son of Man. Jesus warned about the plot to kill him and during the first Lord’s Supper, he took bread, broke it and gave to the disciples by saying: ‘This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.’ In the same way he took the cup and said: ‘this cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.’Jesus said woe to the man who is going to betray him and also predicted Peter’s denial. Jesus asked his disciples to pray while at the Mount of Olives so that they may not fall into temptation. He knelt and prayed to the Father: “My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will.”

As predicted by Jesus, Judas betrayed Him and had gone through a fake trial before Pilate. When Jesus was brought before the governor, he asked him, "Are you the king of the Jews?" "You have said so," Jesus replied. Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was: ‘JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS.’ Finally He was crucified between two thieves, but he did not forget the one who requested him to remember him when he is in paradise by promising that ‘you will be in paradise with me.’

Jesus revealed Himself to Mary Magdalene and to His disciples and also to the two Emmaus run-away disciples.

The reality of risen Jesus is that everything written about Him in the law of Mosses, prophets and Psalms have been fulfilled in the birth, life, death and resurrection. He reminded them about what is written about Him: ‘the Messiah would suffer and rise from the dead on the third day and repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed to all nations in His name and told them that He is sending them as father has promised.’

He led them to Bethany and blessed them and while blessing them, He left them and was carried into heaven.

After worshipping Him, the disciples returned to Jerusalem with great joy. This is the same joy Gabriel proclaimed that the birth of Jesus would be a joy to the world. The story of the world meeting Jesus in the flesh is a story of the world finding their full joy in God. We share the same joy as faithful witnesses, as shared by the disciples during the ascension of Jesus. The final exhortation of Jesus to His disciples was: "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." (Matthew 28:19) The accounts of the ministry of Jesus by the gospel writers include: his teachings, the parables and miracles, which reveal the identity of Jesus. He is not only a Messiah, the people of His time was waiting for, but one who died for us on the cross for our sins and promised to return to gather the faithful for an eternal life with Him in heaven. Those who rejoice at Jesus’s coming may suffer in this life, but their weakness, pain, and misery here are nothing compared with the glories they already have in Jesus, the Christ. Let us declare to the world that Jesus is the Son of God, who came down to save us from our sins so that we can to be with the Triune God in heaven for enjoying an eternal life.

The one who born in Bethlehem was born to die in our place.

He embraced the cross and received the wrath, which we deserved for our sin. He died to purchase the joy the angels announced at His birth. He rules the world in truth and grace, and makes nations prove the glories of His righteousness, and wonders of His love. The Jesus, who died, never surrendered to death, but rose and reigns in glory and return to gather the faithful to be with Him for an eternal life in heaven. ‘Joy to the world, the Lord is come! Let earth receive her King; Let every heart prepare him room.’

This was and is Jesus; it is based on the texts in the gospels, which describe the birth, genealogy, life, ministry, miracles, death, and resurrection of Jesus the Christ.

25 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

CHRISTIANITY AND THE ASCETIC IDEAL Revd Dr. Valson Thampu, Trivandrum Life demands discipline. The essence of discipline, understood in the genius of biblical spirituality, is ‘positive’, not ‘negative’. In being disciplined, the significant thing is not that one says ‘no’ to certain things; like meat, fish or milk, say, during the season of Lent. It is saying ‘yes’ to life and, as Jesus said, ‘life in all its fullness’. Merely giving up something, because it is mandated by a system, is a dissembling substitute for discipline. It is mere compliance. Compliance is, in the very nature of it, apt to be superficial.

Asceticism is common to philosophy and spirituality. The realization that a life of sensual indulgence undermines the discipline of doing philosophy existed from the early days of that discipline. Plato remained unmarried. So also did Spinoza, Leibnitz, Descartes, Kant and Schopenhauer. (Philosophy died, historically, in the wake of sex liberation.) Socrates seems an exception to this pattern. But the story has it that he married Xantippe, known for her ill-temper, to perfect his fortitude, meekness and self-control! His married life was a sort of camouflaged celibacy and poverty.

Now, over to spirituality: Gautama Buddha, though married, left his home, wife and son when the call of the eternal resounded in his soul. Even before that fateful day, when the news of the birth of his son was conveyed to him, Gautama is reported to have said, “Rahula is born to me, a fetter is forged for me.” Like Tolstoy centuries later, he found freedom in leaving his home, except that Tolstoy embraced the freedom of homelessness at the close of his life. Jesus said about himself, “The foxes have their holes, the birds in the air have their nests; but the son of man has nowhere to lay his head.”

There is a difference between philosophical asceticism and spiritual asceticism. The former serves humanity by generating insights and deeper understanding. The latter, by promoting and facilitating life abundant. They have to be judged accordingly. While the merit of philosophical asceticism can be ascertained in terms of the profundity of the insights it helps to generate, spiritual asceticism must justify itself by its impact on the quality and dignity of life it promotes. A tree, Jesus said, shall be known by its fruits.

In general, asceticism has three basic ingredients: poverty, chastity and humility. They are more pronounced in spiritual asceticism than in its philosophical counterpart. What needs to be noted is that this ascetic formula has been modified under the auspices of church discipline. It is no longer poverty, chastity and humility; but ‘poverty, celibacy and obedience’. There is a logic to

this change. It points to a change in the scope and purpose of this asceticism.

The philosopher and the priest are envisaged to live and work on an exalted platform. Transcending the shackles of earthly enmeshment is deemed a precondition for it.

Sensual indulgence is a soul-and-mind-deadening thing.

It needs to be avoided so that the priest and the philosopher may serve the highest interests of humankind. If this purpose is sidelined, the spirituality of asceticism becomes an ornament or a facade. It gets infected with personal vanity. So, we have religious men and women who take ‘pride’ in adhering to ascetic practices! This mocks the spirit of asceticism.

Poverty is not an end in itself. Not owning anything is the shell of poverty, not its kernel. The essence of poverty is freedom from dictates of personal will, or self-denial. One may own nothing, but if one is a control-freak –say, in administration- it is anything but poverty! Or, if it is poverty, it is other people’s poverty! A complete renunciation of profit motive is basic to poverty. Profit militates against poverty.

Further, poverty needs to be not only physical but also spiritual. The willingness to suffer for righteousness’ sake is the essence of spiritual poverty. “Blessed are you when men revile you, persecute you and say all manner of evil falsely against you for my sake; rejoice, for great is your reward in heaven.” Poverty of this kind rules out vindictiveness and revenge. The willingness to suffer for the sake of justice is the best antidote to cruelty and spite.

But, whether it is physical or spiritual poverty, it does not amount to spiritual asceticism if it is not meant to enrich others. If others do not become richer because I am poor, mine is no spiritual poverty. It was because Jesus embraced true asceticism that he could say, “Come to me, all who labour and are heavy-laden; I will give you rest.” Even if you live in a mud hovel, but have no space for others in your life, you are not poor in the ascetic sense of the term. Diogenes of Sinope lived in poverty, we are richer for it to this day!

Now consider chastity. Chastity is not celibacy! Married people can be, and need to be, chaste. The arbitrary identification of chastity with celibacy is an unfortunate mistake, even if it is not accidental. It is hard to believe that the imposition of mandatory celibacy on priests and nuns is guided purely by spiritual considerations. This needs to be faced and interrogated. Chastity is spiritually natural and healthy. Celibacy, except as a special covenant between individuals and God, is not. What is

26 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

unnatural cannot endure wholesomely. What cannot so endure has to be preserved by force. What needs the use of force to survive, runs counter to the grain of spirituality.

Involuntary celibacy is vulnerable to abuse and aberration. It degrades a natural instinct into a site of avoidable deception and perversion.

Celibacy, if it is to endure at all, needs to be erected firmly on the foundation of chastity. Chastity entails commitment to an absolute cause, which is the essence of spiritual poverty as well. Spiritual poverty seems ‘poverty’ (understood as deprivation) only to the eye of the world. To a spiritually chaste person it is, as Jesus said, the treasure that the world cannot corrupt. Whatever does not yield ‘love, peace, joy…” is not spiritual; for the fruit of the Spirit includes joy. Spiritually valid poverty has nothing to do with coercion and misery.

Now consider humility. Humility is humane; whereas obedience lends itself to a hierarchical re-configuration.

Priests, for instance, are required to be obedient to bishops. Priests, in turn, exact obedience from the laity.

This is hardly humility! All –prelates, priests, laity- are required to be humble before God. The problem with humility is that it seems harmful to the cohesion of the establishment, which seems to need the glue of authoritarian authority. So, we reach the contradiction that in order to be efficaciously humble in an institutional sense, one has to be authoritarian!

True humility, Soren Kierkegaard said, is not humility before men, but humility before God, which could seem arrogance in the sight of others. The problem is that the ‘establishment’ has no means to know if the person concerned, who seems ‘disobedient’, is indeed humble before God and if her seeming rebelliousness stems from meekness. It is a wise thing, in that case, to err on the side of abundant caution and to walk an extra-mile in tolerance.

There are serious issues pertaining to the ascetic ideal when it is institutionalized. They need to be faced, not swept under the carpet. A hammer-and-tong approach will prove counter-productive. Time will separate the chaff from the grain, inexorably. It is deaf to alibis and arguments. The ascetic ideal is basic to biblical spirituality; but it needs to be understood and nurtured aright with special reference to the principle that whatever requires the use of force for its efficacy is dubious in its spiritual mettle. i

Abraham Philip, The History and Theology of the Gospel According to St. John (Tiruvalla: CSS, 1918), 58 ii J. H. Bernard, Bernard, J. H., John, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on John (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1928), cxvii.

Ask FOCUS [The following question arose out of a discussion with one of our regular contributors and a Bible study group in London.]

John the Baptist, from the prison, sent two of his disciples with the question: "Are you the coming one, or do we look for another? (Mt. 11: 2-19; Lk. 7: 19-28) According to the gospels, John knew from his mother's womb, who Jesus was, he witnessed what had happened at the baptism of Jesus. He pointed out Jesus to others. Then why did he ask this question? Was it for the benefit of the two disciples? Was Jesus hesitant in any way to declare his Messianic title?

RESPONSE: Revd Dr. Valson Thampu, Trivandrum 1. While John the Baptist was the first to recognize the extraordinary significance and mission of Jesus Christ, he was, in comparison to Jesus, limited in his understanding and the full scope of spirituality. It is important to note that it was while he was in prison that the Baptist developed this uncertainty or perplexity. It shows the human side of the Baptist and, hence, the question he raised. It is quite common that our convictions are shaken by what overtakes us. No one should presume on his or her ability to stand steadfastly by what is known or believed. This is evident, even more dramatically, from the experience of Peter, who denies his Master, despite being forewarned.

He did not lack conviction or determination. But everything melts away in the heat of adversity. It is a warning valid for all times to come. It highlights the need for humility and the need to depend on the grace of God. 2. There is an even more profound purpose behind including this in the gospel narrative. To understand this, we must read Jesus’ response to the Baptist’s question.

To the emissaries Jesus responds, “Go and tell John that lepers are cleansed, the blind see, the lame walk, the deaf hear, the dead are raised….” Then we have the shocker.

“But blessed are those who are not offended at me.”

The main purpose of this text, I believe, is to spotlight the idea of “offence”. In the sphere of religion, there is offence, which is unavoidable. But offence is of two kinds. There is superfluous offence and there is necessary offence.

Superfluous offence is created by others irrespective of

27 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

who you are. It has no bearing on the truth about you, which God alone knows for sure. Much of the media controversy is of this kind. Necessary offence pertains not to what you do, but who you are. Jesus is the Son of God. The offence that people feel about him cannot be understood by what he does. He offends even when he does what is supremely beneficial to all, like healing and restoring lives to health and wholeness. The offence felt about Jesus is offence about who he is.

This was a problem even for Peter. Peter was confused about what theologians would, later, call the hypostatic nature of Jesus; that is, that Jesus is at once man and God. It is far easier to accept Jesus either as man or as God. But, it is so very difficult, as Kierkegaard pointed out, to understand and accept this idea of the “God-Man”.

Human beings no way to comprehend this hybrid category.

Now the question, “For whose benefit is this insight provided?” Well, for the benefit of humanity at large. That is because, the insight it encapsulates is universal in its scope and application. This applies to each one of us; especially to those who endeavour to be faithful to their God-given inner core of spiritual light. It is necessary that this is understood aright. Hence the following words.

There are, broadly speaking, two categories of people.

The first category comprises what may be called the “compromising” (or, less flatteringly, “chameleon”) type.

They are the vast majority in our species. They adjust to the given context and turn a deaf ear to their own conscience. In the language of St. Paul (ref. Rom.12:2), they ‘conform’ to the pattern of the world and get along smoothly. In them the problem of offence is minimized.

They stand for nothing in particular. They have no opinion of their own. No, clear sense of purpose. They cause no ripples. They cause no disturbance, no disturbance, to anyone. (But they live inwardly troubled all the way!) Also, they have no inner core. No one knows what they stand for. They drift through life. They are defined by the context.

They remain alien to themselves. In the words of Oscar Wilde, they are “other people”. Their opinions, convictions, and even passions are borrowed from others.

The second category comprises those who think and choose for themselves. In the religious context (as against the philosophical or secular) they do so in relation to the will of God for them. In the words of Immanuel Kant, they are headed towards intellectual and spiritual “maturity”; whereas those in the former category stay stuck, and die, in immaturity. Immaturity denotes a state in which one lives as dictated by others. Its hallmark is ‘conformity’, which is a serious problem, which demands much spiritual vigilance, in the sphere of religions.

In every age, every society, every institution, including the church, those who claim for themselves the right and freedom to think and choose, to formulate their own understanding and responses, are felt as sources of disturbance. They are apt to be mistaken for rebels and enemies. That is why, as Jesus said, Prophets will never be welcome among their own people. They will be stoned to death or cast out.

Now consider the irony that it is a “prophet” – one acknowledged as the greatest among men born of women

by Jesus himself – who raises the question we are trying to come to terms with! And this prophet is in prison. There is no place for him within the establishment. It has been a critical issue, from the dawn of civilization as to how much truth human beings can tolerate. The case of Socrates is illustrative of it. Truth-seekers, as against those who merely conform to the status quo, are apt to be seen as enemies of the society (Hendrik Ibsen has a play by that title); or, in the term now current in India, “anti-national” elements. This is not merely a political problem. It is even more acute in the religious sphere.

Jesus knew this to be case! He also knew, therefore, the importance of this phenomenon for the spiritual health of religious communities. The question that this, otherwise enigmatic, event, illustrates is this: To what extent can church be conducive to the stature, integrity and authenticity of human personality? Is insistence on abject conformity, in the name of ‘loyalty to the church’ (which avoids offence altogether), conducive to the spiritual freedom and robustness of its members? Should authenticity of being human be sacrificed to the requirements implied in belonging to an organized group?

These are harsh questions; but they are, clearly, immanent in this episode. Jesus “offends” simply by being true to himself (not because he wants to offend), his spiritual mission and his obedience to his Father in Heaven. This faces him with a choice. Should he dilute/compromise his commitment to God in order to avoid turbulence to the system? Or, should he stay faithful and face the consequences that include crucifixion?

This dilemma is at the heart of being a follower of Christ; even it may seem superfluous to nominal Christians for whom the perks of church membership and the patronage of church hierarchy are more important than membership in the Kingdom of God. Every person of faith, every ‘disciple’, has to sort this out one way or other. That is why, I believe, it is recorded with such prominence in the gospel narrative.

28 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

MARANATHA OR MANNA? Chhotebhai, Kanpur, India Christmas is a time when devout Christians use the invocation “Maranatha”. It is the concluding line in the Bible that means “Come Lord Jesus” (Rev 22:20). It is most appropriate for Advent. This phrase is earlier used

by St Paul in his benediction to the Corinthians (cf 1 Cor 16:22), where the expression means “Our lord has come”.

Has Jesus already come, or is he yet to come? That is precisely the meaning of Christmas. He comes, ever comes.

This Aramaic phrase was apparently in common usage, which is why St Paul used it to bless the Hellenists (Greek speaking) believers in Corinth. In the title I have also used the Hebrew word Manna. Devout Christians believe this to be the miraculous heavenly bread with which God sustained the chosen people during their 40-year sojourn in the desert (cf Ex 16:12ff).

But Manna does not mean bread. It was an exclamation “What is it?” as it was an inexplicable phenomenon.

Exegetes tell us that it was actually a sweet resin exuded by a desert tree tamarix mannifera, when its bark was burrowed by the insect gossyparia manniparia.

Coincidentally, the lime tree in my garden is displaying the same phenomenon at the time of writing. The Bedouin tribe in the Sinai peninsular (Arabs) called it Mann, and the correct Hebrew word is Manhu.

Devout Christians maybe shocked at this demythologising of a miraculous (divine intervention) event. Rather than weakening my faith it actually strengthens it. If both faith and science are seeking after truth then they must be pointed in the same direction. They are two sides of the same coin. Faith seeks to tell us WHY things happen, while science tells us HOW things happen. They are complementary, not contradictory.

The problem arises when one encroaches on the competence of another, as with Darwin or Galileo. Science teaches us that for 20 billion years creation has been evolving, and still is. The Genesis account of creation is divided into seven days. That may be interpreted as seven stages of creation that are actually compatible with science – heat, light, gas, liquid, solid etc.

Unfortunately many learned people sometimes encroach on another’s territory and use clever arguments to arrive at erroneous conclusions. Two such instances are Dan Brown’s Da Vinci Code and Stephen Hawking’s A Brief History of Time. I have deconstructed both their hypotheses earlier, but will briefly touch on them here.

Brown at least admits that he is writing fiction, though his not so hidden target was to demythologise Jesus and more particularly the Catholic Church. I give two examples. He compares the apple in the Garden of Eden to Newton’s theory of gravity. He uses da Vinci’s painting of the Last Supper to “prove” that Jesus’ “wife” Mary Magdalene was seated next to him.

Tough luck for Brown; because there is no reference to an apple in Eden, nor elsewhere in the Bible, as it is not a Mediterranean fruit. This common misconception may have crept in after St Jerome, the first exegete, translated th the Bible into Latin, in the 4 century. The Latin word for evil, as in Genesis, is malum, as in malafide or malnutrition. The Latin botanical name for apple is malus pumila. Malum may have got corrupted to Malus in the course of time.

Da Vinci, who was born 1600 years after the Last Supper, did a painting of it with a blue sky, golden locks and a dining table. How could there have been a blue sky at night? Semitics like Jesus sat on the ground to eat, unlike the Romans at table. Jesus, the Asian, did not have blonde hair!

On the other hand Hawking claimed that there was no beginning and end of time, therefore any creation or Creator, because the universe was circular, not linear, and the sum total of all matter was zero. My counter argument was that a sphere has both linear and circular dimensions.

A book of accounts may have both credit and debit entries, and yet have a zero balance. Hawking was using a thermometer to measure length and a tape to measure temperature. Having used the wrong tools he, but naturally, arrived at the wrong conclusions!

This brings me back to the two words – Maranatha and Manna. I have been party to some correspondence between a former priest/ editor, a leading Catholic theologian and a reformist Hindu swami. Some of the averments that they made were – that Jesus did not found a church, religion or priestly class, and that he was a prophet who rebelled against social injustice and the religious hypocrisy of his time. When I questioned one of them he sarcastically labeled me a “know all”. Another qualified his statement to say that the church and priesthood as they exist today are not what Jesus intended or instituted. To Maranatha they seemed to be saying, Manna (what is this?) or questioning some of the basic tenets of Christianity.

Rather than entering into a futile intellectual debate I thought of this riposte. Most of their contentions are based on renewed research in sacred scripture. I am a college dropout who has never studied scripture or theology, hence cannot counter their clever arguments.

29 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

I am an ordinary worker like Jesus the carpenter. He knew his profession and that of others like shepherds, farmers and fishermen. Hence he spoke their idiom, to which his listeners responded by saying “He taught them as one who had authority and not as their scribes” (Mat 7:29). A scribe is a writer, just as a cleric is; one who can read and write. Jesus reportedly wrote just once, that too in the dust (cf Jn 8:5). I too am not a scribe/cleric under a roof, but more like a scribbler on the roof! So I shall adopt Jesus’ approach.

During one of my first gospel journeys in 1976 (with just a small cloth shoulder bag and no money) I had constantly experienced the power of God’s word. When I landed up in Allahabad, Fr Dhiranand Bhatt, of revered memory, asked me to share my experiences with the seminarians. I was speaking of the power of the Word of God in my life.

A young man in the last row kept asking me what I meant by that. On enquiry, Fr Bhatt later told me that he was the Professor of Sacred Scripture, freshly returned from Rome. It reminds me of what George Menezes wrote in the introduction to one of my books, that there is a difference between studying about the good shepherd, and actually knowing him.

Let me give another allegory. Though approaching 70, I am a “normal” man who is attracted to women, including their physical attributes. However, had I been a professor of anatomy, constantly dissecting women’s cadavers, I may have developed a repulsion or insensitivity to the human body. Is this what happens to scripture scholars dissecting scripture?

Psychologists study the sub-conscious being. There are levels of consciousness and resultant actions. It is sometimes compared to peeling an onion. There is always another layer below, finally leaving one with nothing. It would then be a fatal error to deny the very existence of the onion. Some existentialists, who are always looking for proof, end up with nothing, as with Jeanne Paul Sartre, who eventually committed suicide.

It reminds me of the warning of the former Superior General of the Jesuits, Fr Pedro Arrupe. He had famously said that in the spiritual life there is no such thing as mathematical assurance. He came from a solid scientific background, besides experiencing the horrors of Hiroshima in World War II, so knew what he was talking about.

I revert to Jesus, the non-scribe/ non-cleric. He compared the kingdom of heaven to a small mustard seed that grew into a mighty tree (cf Lk 4:31 ff). Had he been born in India he would have given the illustration of the pipal tree. Its seed is tiny. Yet it grows without nutrients in the tiniest crack in a rock, and eventually splits it wide open. The

seed and the tree are in inverse proportion, having no physical semblance to each other. The same may be said of the life and growth of the church, as an organised body.

It may have little or no resemblance to the tiny seed planted in apostolic times. That doesn’t disprove its DNA. Another analogy. A human embryo has little or no resemblance to a grown up human being. Yet it has all those qualities, though not discernible to the naked eye.

The same may again be said of the church. After 2000 years of its existence it would be an exercise in futility to turn the clock back to its embryonic stage. Nicodemus said as much to Jesus, “How can a grown man be born again? He certainly cannot enter his mother’s womb and be born a second time” (Jn 3:4).

But Jesus talks of another rebirth, a spiritual one (cf Jn 3:6). As a married man I understand this. When I got married 35 years ago I was certain that I loved my wife.

Now I cannot say this with the same certitude. It is not that I do not love her. Rather it is because our love has grown, evolved and mutated. Love can never be static. It must keep evolving.

So too for faith. It cannot and should not remain static.

John the Baptist warned the status quoists against taking pride in the faith of their ancient father Abraham (cf Mat 3:9). Even today there are many traditionalist/ conservative Catholics who cannot digest the changes wrought by Vatican II. More recently they are up in arms against the just concluded Amazonian Synod that, among others, recommended a married clergy.

Faith, like love, must change, evolve, mutate. There is always the risk of going off on a tangent. That should not deter us from seeking constant research, reform and renewal, while also holding fast to the roots of our faith in Jesus and his eternal Word. In all humility, be we scribes or scribblers, we could learn from St Ephraem, one of the early church fathers. He said that the Word of God was like a deep well. Every time one visited it one found something new.

May that unquenchable thirst for truth, faith and love be our guiding light. As enlightened Christians we can approach this Christmas by saying with faith Maranatha, and with reason Manna. * This writer has developed these thoughts in greater detail in his books “The Trinity & Me”, “Beyond 2000 – The Other Side” and “An Unfinished Symphony”. Chhotebhai is the assumed pen name of Mr. Alan de Noronha from Kanpur, India. He was a Former National President of All India Catholic Union, former Director International Council of Catholic Men, President Kanpur Catholic Association.

30 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

Pearls of Wisdom Series: No.13 A reading from the Sermons of St. Leo the Great* (The law was given by Moses: Grace and truth have come through Jesus Christ.)

In the presence of chosen witnesses the Lord unveils his glory, investing with such splendour that bodily appearance which he shares with the rest of men that his face shines like the sun and his clothes becomes white as snow.

The primary purpose of this transfiguration was to remove the scandal of the cross from the hearts of Christ’s disciples; the greatness of his hidden glory was revealed to them to prevent their faith being shaken by the selfabasement of the suffering he voluntarily to undergo. No less was the foresight that laid the foundations of the Church’s hope, teaching the whole body of Christ, the nature of change it is to receive, and schooling his members to look forward to share in the glory which had already shone forth in their head.

that is to be revealed in us. And again: You have died, your life is hidden with Christ in God. When Christ who is your life appears, then you will also appear with him in glory.

Still further instruction was to come from the transfiguration to fortify the apostles and perfect their understanding. Moses and Elijah, representing the law and the prophets, appeared in conversation with the Lord.

Thus through the presence of these five men the saying was fulfilled: On the evidence of two or three witnesses every word shall stand. What could be more firmly established than that the Word in whose proclamation the trumpets of Old and New Testament sound in unison, and the writings of the ancient witnesses are in perfect accord with the teachings of the gospel? The pages of both covenants agree with one another. He who had been promised beforehand by mysteriously veiled signs was now revealed clearly and distinctly in radiance of his glory, since, as St. John says, the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth have come from Jesus Christ. In Christ what was promised by prophetic figures and what was signified by legal precepts are alike fulfilled, for by his presence he teaches the truth of the prophecies, and by grace he makes it possible for us to obey his commandments.

May we all, therefore, be confirmed in our faith through the preaching of the holy gospel, and let no one be ashamed of the cross by which Christ has redeemed the world.

None of us must be afraid to suffer for the sake of justice or doubt the fulfilment of the promises, for it is through toil that we come to rest and through death that we pass to life. If we continue in the acknowledgement and love of Christ who took upon himself all the weakness of our lowly nature, what he conquered we shall conquer, and the promise that he gave us we shall receive. So then, whether it is to encourage us to obey his commands or to endure hardships, let the Father’s voice always be ringing in our ears and telling us: This is my beloved son, in whom I am well pleased; listen to him.

The Lord had told them of this when he spoke of his coming in majesty: Then shall the just shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. The blessed apostle Paul bears witness to the same thing: I consider the sufferings of the present time are not worth comparing with the glory

Pope Leo I (c. 400 – 10 November 461), also known as St. Leo the Great, was Bishop of Rome from 29 September 440 and died in 461. He was a Roman aristocrat, and was the first Pope to have been called "the Great". He is most remembered theologically for issuing the document, which was a major thesis to the debates of the fourth Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon.

This Council dealt primarily with Christology, and elucidated the orthodox definition of Christ's being as the hypostatic union of two natures, divine and human. This important sermon is taken from a collection edited by Henry Ashworth O.S.B, ‘A Word in Season’, The Talbot Press, Dublin, 1974.

Collected by Dr. Zac Varghese

31 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

THE HOLY BOOKS - Part 5 Dr. Ian Fry, Honorary Postdoctoral Associate, University of Divinity, Melbourne [This article is written for the 8th Holy Book Conference held a t Kuala Lumpur in April 2019 under the auspices of the United Religious Initiative (URI). Part-2 of this paper appeared in the July issue of the FOCUS, 2019, Vol. 7 (3), page 26-28. Part-3 of this paper appeared in the October issue of the FOCUS, Vol.7 (4) page 30-32. Part-4 can be found in the January Issue of the FOCUS, Vol 8 (1) pages 31-34. This is the final part. ]

The Home Run? Or Time for Reformation?

Romanus Pontifex effectively marked the completion of the development of the world’s five great religions, and the events and humanity’s conduct during the five centuries since then must be considered through the prism of that event. However, that in no way belittles or distracts from the significance of subsequent religious and philosophical developments which help us understand the interaction of the great five and the turmoil in global affairs that we have a responsibility to help unravel so that humanity can progress instead of blundering into abysmal destruction.

When the Protestant Reformation burst in 1517, its early emphasis was on the concepts of redemption, purgatory, grace, priestly intercession, indulgences and penance, and corruption, and during thirty years of civil war the Western church was torn to shreds with arguments over Christology, communion, transubstantiation, baptism, predestination, resurrection, justification, and relations between Christians, Jews and Muslims. Numerous denominations were soon exporting Europe’s religious conflicts, taking their separate scriptures and liturgies with them as they competed for converts in colonies in Africa, Asia, the Americas and Australasia either on the basis of national church affiliation or theological disputation.

Supersessionism and Islam’s rejection of incarnation and Trinitarian theology became distractions from eurocentrism.

The coincidence of that reformation in Christianity and the early stages of the European Colonial Era were unfortunate. Christians were coming into contact with the Axial Age religions and philosophies for the first time, and persuading themselves that Islam didn’t really count, just as humanity was entering the foothills phase of accelerated population expansion. It would soon have to cope with critical discoveries in biology, astronomy, physics, chemistry and medicine, the industrial revolution, and new approaches to law and governance of the Enlightenment were being introduced at a frenetic pace.

Little thought was being given to the challenge of the cliff face of exponential population growth that was coming into view. It was assumed that any population pressures and the need for additional resources would be offset by voluntary emigration and the export of undesirables to lands that were being discovered, claimed, explored and

exploited. The world was indeed entering a new age, and a series of factors challenged the belief and authority systems, the self-understandings and practices of the Western faith communities. In sequence, they might have appeared to be disconnected or related essentially to political or scientific developments, but they each required the Abrahamic leaderships to re-examine the nature of creation, the concept of original sin, resurrection, the basis of the covenants under which they lived, their fundamental obligations, the relationships between them, and their role in civil governance. However, the Christian churches were more challenged than their Abrahamic partners because of the systems and creeds they had established. They therefore had somewhat more changes to consider, but they ‘put the shutters up.’ Other faiths, the Axial Age and New Age religions that were not tied down to such rigid systems of belief and canon law, might also have found it advisable to reflect on matters of cultural and social conduct as they arose, if they felt constrained by traditional cultural practices. Significant challenges to the church’s theology, teaching and self-understanding occurred in relatively quick succession as follows. 1609: the development of the telescope enabled Nicholas Copernicus and Galileo Galilei to determine that the Earth revolved around the sun. Galileo went further, discovered the rings of Saturn, sunspots and Jupiter’s moons, and confirmed the Heliocentric model. The Church disapproved because Holy Scripture states that the Earth is at the centre, not the Sun. The Bible was to be taken literally so he was tried by the Inquisition and placed under house arrest by the Catholic Inquisition until his death in 1642.

1644: two years after Galileo’s death, Lightfoot and Usher dated creation by biblical calculation as having occurred in 4004 BCE, 246 years earlier than previously proposed by Jewish scholars. The church was satisfied. 1686: the Enlightenment was triggered by Newton, Locke and others and introduced a wave of pressure for civil liberties, educational development through scientific academies, toleration, fraternity, constitutional government and separation of church and state. 1700: archaeological studies began in earnest. Discoveries were soon challenging historical understanding and the Society of Antiquaries was established in 1707-1780: as the industrial revolution began the pressure for social change increased with major changes in community relations and social organization in line with the Enlightenment. 1807: the establishment of a Great Sanhedrin in France by Napoleon stimulated the life of the Jewish community and sent shock waves through the Christian Church which could not understand such a change of attitude towards Judaism and made no effort to modify its teaching or welcome such a change in attitude. 1830: Joseph Smith Jr. retrieved, deciphered or translated messages from a set of plates said to have been revealed to him by an

32 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

angel and published them as The Book of Mormon.

Regarded as a work of blasphemy by a religious imposter, it contradicted much main stream Christian teaching.

Highly Christocentric but anti-Trinitarian and pro-Jewish, it is emphatic on the concept of covenant and affirms Israel’s covenant while maintaining that Jesus Christ is the manifestation of God to all the nations, and anticipates the building of Zion through interaction between religious communities. It proposes that Gentiles will learn the Will of God through the preaching of Jews, Salvation will come circumstantially when Gentiles witness and acknowledge the fulfilment of the Covenant, and there is no call for conversion of the Jewish community to Christianity. 1859: the biggest challenge to date came from Charles Darwin’s ‘On the Origin of Species.’ Darwin did not challenge the concept of a Divine Creator: only the notion of a fixed and final form creation, but because so much Christian theology was based on that notion, his challenge was effectively to the basis of the self-understanding and developed theology of all three streams: Roman Catholic, Orthodox and Reformed. If humans evolved progressively, then there was no single first couple, Adam and Eve; therefore there was no “Original Sin”, and the Biblical stories of the Garden of Eden and the Great Flood must have been myths. If there was no original sin the whole field of Reformation covenant theology had to be reexamined – on the basis of the mature Hebrew understanding of covenant. 1864: the Vatican reacted with determination and some vitriol. It issued the Syllabus of Errors, condemning Darwin’s work and everything published contradictory to church teaching. 1867: Karl Marx publication of Das Kapital, was a remarkable assault on the social and economic structures that were propped up by the church as being consistent with Gospel teaching.

1870: the Vatican acted again with determination to protect its status by convening the First Vatican Council. A few years short of eight centuries after Dictatus Papae it issued the Dogmatic Constitution of the Church linked to a Declaration of Papal Infallibility. It did not make the extravagant claims of Dictatus Papae, basing claims of Primacy on succession to the Apostle Saint Peter instead, but it implied succession to Israel as the People of God fulfilling a particular function when the Dogmatic Constitution was amended by the Second Vatican Council, and Lumen Gentium was promulgated in November 1964, when the notion of Supersessionism was already being questioned.

1872: after 25 years of increasing tension between the German Government and the Vatican over the role of the Catholic Church in politics and government, and in response to the declaration of papal infallibility, German leaders Bismarck and Falk agreed to legislation, the Kulturkampf, to strip the church of much of its authority, especially in education, marriage and law. 1878: after years researching and teaching in all three Abrahamic

faiths, Julius Wellhausen published Prolegomena zur Geschichte Israels and a Documentary Hypothesis establishing that the Hebrew Bible had not been written in the historical sequence implied by its structure; that it was composed from many sources, gathered in several identifiable periods; and subsequently edited, (redacted), into its current form in several stages. This meant that teaching across the three Abrahamic faiths relating to early history, and especially the series of creation myths, had to be revised. It validated Galileo and Darwin and assisted studies in religious history and theology. 1882: the new Russian Pale of Settlement undermined the improved relations between Christians and Jews that had followed Napoleon’s program of emancipation. The policy of herding Jews into ghettos had ended but towards the end of the century social unrest throughout Europe increased, the level of Anti-Semitism progressively worsened and nationalism increased. The Jewish communities were subjected to greater isolation and violence and what proved to be the last fifty years of the fourth epoch were traumatic indeed. Anti-Semitism plumbed new depths and France’s Dreyfus Affair prompted the establishment of the World Zionist Organization. It lobbied governments and the Vatican for help to establish a Jewish homeland, preferably in Palestine In spite of the WZO’s vigorous campaigning there was very little support for the notion of Zionism until, during World War One, Britain found itself facing the prospect of defeat. The WZO offered its support, the British Government accepted it and announced in the Balfour declaration that it supported the proposal and ii would use its best endeavours to help bring it about. But while support from WZO and the British dominions and colonies helped Britain through that crisis it was still in a weakened position and needed US support to survive and to have any hope of clinging onto its empire. However, because President Wilson would not support Zionism and did not want to get involved in Europe’s war, the British government turned to manoeuvring his Christian affiliation while the WZO applied pressure through the Jewish leadership in the US. The US thereupon entered the war on Wilson’s terms and subject to his aim of dismantling Europe’s monarchies and replacing them with republics on ii the US model. That was no easy task and it was only achieved in part after the war had been extended with bombardment on a massive scale, involving the mass use of gas against German entrenched-troops that left many partially blinded. Among them was Adolf Hitler who experienced messianic visions of a future leadership role, entered politics, rose to the Chancellorship, and determined to restore his nation’s position at the expense of the Western Powers and the Jewish communities that ii had collaborated with them. Britain was not in a position to act on its Balfour Declaration; no Western nations would ii agree to accept large scale Jewish immigration, so Europe bumbled its way into another world war. Hitler’s

33 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

subjection to religion-based Anti-Semitism drove him on to look for other means than enforced emigration to eliminate Jewish influence, and his ‘final solution’ was mass extermination through the gas chambers of the Holocaust.

In due course, when the second world war ended, Western Christian populations were horrified to find the church’s involvement in all of these issues and pressure mounted for Zionist authorities to be granted Palestine for the home they believed they were entitled to. Britain had no choice but to renege on its mandatory obligations; the United States was eager to gain control of the revised territorial arrangement so it sponsored the partition of Palestine in order to gain a privileged position from which ii to control and exploit the resources of the Middle East. It succeeded and as a consequence of complex global interaction the world reached the Central Fact of the Common Era in 1948 with the establishment of the State of Israel. It is the Central Fact of the Common Era because the conduct and interaction between of the people of the three Abrahamic faiths, and the circumstances since the close of the second epoch, (by which time all of the recognized five “great religions” had been established), have confirmed the reality of the principal components of each divine covenant. In particular the reality of the relationship between the Divine and humanity is also being demonstrated. When that reality is understood by world leaders the world will be at the dawn of a sixth epoch. The fact is that: the reactions of communities that have been disadvantaged (the WMP) by the actions of covenanted religious communities (the WWCB plus Israel) have become the mechanism of punishment for serious breaches of covenantal obligations by those who manipulated circumstances to gain the advantages that they are now in the process of relinquishing as we enter a new age (the WWCB plus Israel). Since the occurrence of that Central Fact of the Common Era, global conflicts have become progressively more devastating, and the regional conflicts that are linked directly to parties in alliances between the State of Israel, its supporters, and its neighbours can only continue to worsen until world leaders acknowledge that the religious self-understanding of the countries involved is basic to the crisis. They must then recognize that the theological concepts involved and the nature of divine covenants are vital considerations if moves towards peace and stability through negotiated reconciliation that provides for security for all peoples through economic and social rationalization are to succeed. As all of those things have come together, people of every continent have experienced intolerance, misunderstanding, friction and conflict that has resulted from the self-understanding of one party or another, territorial encroachment to proselytize, or the introduction of undesirable cultural practices by foreign industrial, commercial, military, evangelical and tourism operations, or even aid organizations that have the best intentions. These are often complicated by fear of ethnic

difference, especially if isolation is a consideration, and if new or unfamiliar technology and practices are involved that may require additional education or training. That brings us back to our starting point and the situation that we face. Major changes to policies resulting from religious self-understanding are required and they cannot be achieved solely through current dialogue programs. The need is for a comprehensive reformation: not by one religion doing another rethink, but by scholars of all world faiths working together to reassess the fundamental concepts around which our communities divide.

According to George Lindbeck, religious understandings shape the entirety of life, and cause conflict because ii believers find it impossible to surrender exclusivist claims.

“Interreligious dialogue and cooperation (are) urgently ii needed in a divided yet shrinking world.” If our descendants are to enjoy a harmonious and stable human future we, and especially our political and religious leaders, must have a better understanding of these issues. Traditionally people have waited to be told by their religious leaders what to believe and how to behave towards others. That is a critical point and shows another observation by Lindbeck to be inconsistent with his statement that religious understandings cause conflict because believers find it impossible to surrender exclusivist claims. He noted that a ground for interreligious dialogue should not involve “what for many believers is the ii impossible condition of surrendering exclusivist claims,” that there is no common foundation for religions to come together, that formulation of a single ground for dialogue applicable to any and every religious encounter is not ii possible , and that because covenant is a divisive and polarizing consideration it must be avoided in interfaith discussion. That view ignores the fact that the three community-specific divine covenants that were imposed on the Jewish, Christian and Muslim communities in a

34 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

three-way partnership each have different emphases and their leaders each focus on a particular aspect of the covenant that they see as applying to them and they cannot focus on other aspects of covenant. If that is so, a knowledge of the circumstances in which each partner faith came into existence and how they are now being called together as a team in a time of critical conflict should enable them to respond to the task that is common to each of them either as a condition of their communityspecific covenants or as the basis of the universal covenant: to enable all humanity to understand and to respond to their relationship with the Divine – with God – and therefore with each other. The details of those circumstances are beyond the scope of this paper, so it is sufficient to note here that the process of reformation through collaborative reassessment of beliefs and attitudes must begin with the Holy Books, not with subsequent literature, and that the concept of covenant is the fundamental starting point. It is clear that this will require a great deal of research and discussion so that we can, together, reassess the fundamental concepts around which our faiths and philosophies divide and then act to offset them. It is also clear that both discussion and action will be necessary at several levels, and the task will not be easy because the hierarchy of the major faiths find the notion of reassessment quite threatening.

Thus: reformation must be a bottom upwards and not a trickledown process while dialogue and review programs continue at three levels, local, regional and peak of faith, together with a major research effort. Teams of scholars of all world faiths and philosophies must be found who can work together in intimate collaboration to examine the origins, meaning and consequences of conflict arising from differing interpretations of fundamental concepts, creeds, doctrinal statements and the neglect or rejection of obligations under divine covenant. The role of the religious hierarchies will be to observe that process, to recognize changes to their systems that may be appropriate, and to model them and steer them into their communities teaching and practice.

Strong and committed support for the research process is vital. That requires money. The demands of pastoral care for adherents whose belief and confidence in their current clergy, lay leaders and structures will be shaken may exceed the capacity currently available so this will also require new approaches and resources that will challenge the capacities of their professional and lay officers at all levels: especially of universities and training institutions.

The task is daunting, but if we are serious about enabling humanity to achieve harmony and stability with justice for all in the context of an appreciation of the relationship between humanity and the Divine, it is a task that cannot be avoided or deferred.

BOOK REVIEW: Karthanvinete Naamathil (All In The Name of Christ) DC Books, Kottayam SR. LUCY BRAKS THE SEAL OF SILENCE Revd Dr. Valson Thampu, Trivandrum

A major sign of religious decay is the equation of solitude with secrecy, silence with enforced un-heard-ness. ‘Unheard-ness’ is the iron curtain that tyrannical systems erect to disempower its victims by banishing them into invisibility. It is part of a comprehensive strategy to deny its victims hope and escape routes, coercing them into resistance-less subjection to exploitative systems laden with overpowering religious or secular meta-narratives of legitimization. Resistance, or ‘disobedience’, in such contexts is discredited as crime or sin, depending on the context.

35 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2

This thought was uppermost in my mind while reading Sr. Lucy Kalappura’s autobiography –as told to Ramadas, who has recorded it for us with sensitivity and competence. The book is titled appropriately as Karthanvinete Naamathil (Or, All In The Name of Christ, DC Books, Kottayam). The narrative is spread over 36 very readable chapters, rich in events and gripping in significance. The account is scanty and selective. It doesn’t pretend to be a comprehensive chronology of the life of an allegedly ‘contumacious’ nun. The protagonist in this story is not Sr. Lucy. It is the human spirit encountering a scheme of things in which thousands of nuns languish in conditions of near-slavery and vulnerability. Karthanvinete Naamathil is, in that sense, not just the memoir of a ‘misfit’ nun, but a case study on the plight of nuns. The title of the book makes excellence sense in this light. It enlarges the canvas of the book’s relevance and deepens its resonance.

Breaching the Berlin Wall of silence is a pattern basic to all reform agendas. The metaphoric legitimacy of institutionalized ‘silence’ is rooted in the soil of the status quo. As a rule, custodians of the status quo impose ‘unheard-ness’ upon its hapless victims. This creates the hypocrisy we are inured to; namely, it is all right to perpetrate outrages but it is improper to expose them. It is this that made Arthur Schopenhauer and Nietzsche say that hypocrisy is inherent in priesthood. In saying so, they weren’t making an original discovery, but only re-stating the stand of Jesus of Nazareth, who condemned the priests of his times as ‘whited sepulchres’.

In Christianity God manifested himself as the Word. So, speaking the truth is basic to biblical spirituality. Jesus claimed to be “the Truth”. Yet, a priestly class arrogated to itself the right to speak and to be heard and to deny the same to all else. This also meant that they could monopolize all ‘doings’ in the name of God. Historically, ‘speaking’ and ‘doing’ can never be separated. The priestly monopoly over speaking and acting ‘in the name of Christ’ consigned the Christian community to passivity and paralysis. Jesus has dealt in detail with this religious aberration.

This reality flickers right through Sr. Lucy’s narrative. She emerges as a paradoxical rebel-victim who dares, in awareness of the consequences, to encounter and interrogate this scheme of things, which, she believes, needs to change. All In The Name of Christ is also a case study on how Christ is defamed and frustrated by those who license themselves to function “in his name”.

In encountering this reality, Sr. Lucy is not alone. She stands in a distinct tradition in which men and women in the past paid with their lives for staying true to their convictions. The victims of the Inquisition, which

exterminated thousands of truth-seekers, are Sr. Lucy’s spiritual ancestors and kinsmen. It is about individuals like her that Bertrand Russell said that true faith is found only among ‘heretics’. She can take heart also from the insight of Dostoevsky and Leo Tolstoy that with the ascension of the church hierarchy, Jesus became an alien and a stranger to the Church. Unlike Dostoevsky, Tolstoy distanced himself from the church to be closer to Jesus Christ. This insight too takes us back to the book of Revelation, where Jesus is portrayed as an outcast from the church of Laodicea. While reading Karthanvinete Naamathil (All in the Name of Christ) it is impossible to resist the awareness that Kerala churches carry the Laodicean DNA, not the spirit of Jesus Christ.

I have always had a sneaking suspicion that Jesus entered the religious history of humankind as the ‘Word’ – which, ipso facto, contravenes establishment mandated ‘un-head-ness’ of the rank and file- as a de-stabilizing force vis-à-vis the institutionalization of religion. In his teachings, Jesus took pains to emphasize that spirituality is a movement and it is impossible to freeze it into stony establishments, which had made Judaism murderously oppressive. As a rule, the establishment is inhospitable to freedom. There is no system or structure in the world geared to human liberation.

All systems work on ‘discipline’, necessarily misunderstood as institutionalized infringement of human freedom. Once its logic is internalized –as Christians are indoctrinated to do from birth onwards- any expression of individual freedom –freedom even to express God-given gifts, as in Sr. Lucy’s case- is readily and convincingly misrepresented as ‘disobedience’ and ‘rebelliousness’ that jeopardizes the church. Sadly, its priestly hierarchy fails to understand that this was what brought about the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ. So, in hounding and persecuting those who thirst for freedom as basic to personal integrity and dignity, they re-enact the Crucifixion of Jesus in diverse metaphoric adaptations.

This process is already anticipated in the Acts of the Apostles, which records the history of the early church.

Sr. Lucy’s account of the happenings in her life as a nun illumines some of the issues I have been grappling with over the years, which is illustrative of its contextual relevance. This book deserves, therefore, serious attention from all who believe that the church must stay true to Jesus Christ, who is its putative foundation. To them I commend it without any hesitation. I am grateful to Sr. Lucy for letting us, as readers, into the sanctuary of what most readers would not, otherwise, have glimpsed even from a distance. Ignorance is not a virtue either in law or in spirituality. Suppression of truth is an act of darkness. Agents of enlightenment must undo the harm, even at extreme costs to oneself.

36 | P a g e F O C U S A p r i l 2 0 2 0 V o l . 8 , N o : 2