ISUA EN

 Lk 22:61 : "Lalpa chu a hawi a, Petera chu a EN a."

 

He Bible chânga EN tih hi duhdah taka thil thlir emaw, melh thuak thuak emaw sawina a ni lova; tum nei ran chunga chiang taka en tihna a ni. He thu hi Chanchin |ha Bu dangah a chuang ve lo nain thu danglam tak a ni. Isua khan kha hun khirh tak maiah khan Petera kha a va en kher a. Khatia a hminga ko lova a mita a en ringawt khan chhan a nei ang. A hminga a koh chuan a lo phatsan zo chauh si a a zah lutuk a hlau a ni thei. Chuvangin mi dangin an hriat thiam si loh, mahse Petera erawh chuan chiang taka a hriat thiam theih tur siin a en ringawt ta zawk a ni. Isuan Petera a en khan sawi tum tam tak a nei niin a lang.

 

Chungte chu han chhui zui ila:

(1) Lamlettîr duhna rilru pua en a ni: Peteran Isua a hriat ngai loh thu a sawi ta mai a. Chuvangin Lalpa chu a hawi a, Petera chu a EN a, "Peter, kha leh chen min zui tawh hnu pawh khan min lo la hre lo cheu a ni maw? Ka hmel hi chiang takin han en la, tunge ka nih han sawi \ha leh teh," a ti niin ka hria. En nawn a, hriat chian a duh a ni.

 

(2) Hauh nana en a ni: Isua hi a lungawi chiah lo niin a lang. Dik tak chuan suala kan tlûk hian Pathian hi a lung a awi lo va, zilhhauna thinlung puin min en reng thin a ni.

 

(3) Khap nei chunga en a ni:  "Peter, tun hun pawimawh lai taka min phatsan si chuan engtikah nge maw min ka tana i pen chhuah anga ka tana i din tehlul ang le? Eng ang Zirtir nge i lo nih chiah? Nang hi paukhauh áwm taka Pathian Fapa ka nih puangchhuaktu leh min phatsan loh turzia puangchhuaktu kha i ni lawm ni?" ti rilru chungin a en niin a lang.

 

(4) Khawngaih ngawih ngawih chunga en a ni: Isua khan Petera kha lainat takin a en niin a lang. "Peter-khawngaihthlak, i thinlung han chak loh em emzia tak chu aw… ka puih loh che chuan eng i lo va ang lo tak em," a ti niin ka hria. Ni e, tawngtaiin chaw nghei eng ang mah ila Isua tel lo chuan eng kan lo va ang lo thin tak em. A nih loh vék leh Isua tel chuan tawngtai leh chaw ngheite hi a lo va sawt awm ve le.

 

(5) Kawhhmuh tum nei rana en a ni: Isua khan Petera hriatthiam theih ngei tura chiangin a mitmei a. Chu chuan Petera chu a tih tur dik tak a hriat chhuahtîr ta ngei a, inchhir tawpkhâwkin a \ap ta zawi zawih mai a ni.

 

Kan zirtur:        

 

Eng kawng zâwng pawha kan phatsan hian Pathian hi a lawm lo va. Suala a mite tlûk chhiat phei chu a duh lo lehzual. Chuvangin Isua Krista meuh pawh a lo kal a ni reng a ni. Nimahsela chuti chung pawhin helhmang misual erawh hi chu a tlu leh nge nge thin a ni. Amaherawhchu khawngaihna leh hmangaihna avangin, kan tel lova a awm theih loh vang pawh ni hauh lovin, kan inlamlêt leh theih nana hun remchang min siamsakin Isuan min en reng a ni. Phatsan leh tawh lo tur leh, kan phatsan avanga pawi ti tak chungin min en a ni. Chutia a lawm loh avanga inbengdai thei tawh lo khawpa thinrim chhia erawh chu a ni rih lo; a tel lova engmah kan tih theih lohzia a hriat chian em avangin min khawngaih a, englai pawhin min pui turin a inpeih reng zawk a ni. Min puih peih loh hun lai a nei lova. Petera anga inchhíra kan inlamlêt theih nan leh kan inhriat chhuah theih nan awmze nei takin min en reng a ni zawk.

 

Hawh u, eng pawh kan lo tisual tawh a ni thei: Isua mitmei en thei tawh lo khawpa thu kun reng lovin, Petera anga Isua mitmei en zâwkin Lalpa lam i hawi leh ang u. Chutah chuan thinlung lungchhiatna dik leh kawng ro su, CHATUAN NUNNA chan theihna a awm a. Chuvangin LAL ISUA lam i en tlat ang u.

ARAB NGE OREB (Midum nge Choâk)

 

 

 

“Nangmah châwm turin Choâkte thu ka pe tawh e.” I Lalte 17:4)

 

 

                    Unau \henkhatin, “Elija chhang petu chu Choâk ni lovin, ‘Arab’ a ni zawk awm e,” an ti a. Chutianga ngaihdân neite chuan a \awng  bul, Hebrai-ah hawrawp pathum  “ ‘ערב’ a ziak vowel tel lova awm chu ‘chhiar dân chi hnih; Oreb – Choâk, Arab – mihang anga chhiar  theih a ni e,” an ti a. Hebrai te hian Vowel an nei mumal lova, chhiar dan chi hnih chi thum a awm \hin reng a.

 

         

                   Hebrai hawrawp (ivrit) hian Vowel a neih \hat vak loh avangin chhiar a lam rik dân a harsa a awm nual a. Hming zahawm, Pathianin a hming Mosia hn>na a hrilh pawh hawrawp pali Tetragramaton-a ziak lam rik  hleihtheih  loh a ni rĕng a.

 

                   Juda mithiam Ashera-hote chuan Hebrai hawrawpah Vowel eng emawti zat siam belhin lam rik theihin an buatsaih a, Pathian hming hawrawp palite-ah chuan, Eloihim Vowel te, Adonai Vowel te belh (Hybrid) in, lamrik theihin an siam ta a. Tichuan ‘ערב’ – ah Vowel ‘o’ ‘e’ an dah belh a, ‘עֹרֵב’ ‘Oreb’ – Choâk tih a chhiar theihin an dah ta ni. Chutiangin thumal dangte pawh a awmze hriat theiha lam rik a lo ni ta a ni.

 

                   Ashera Family-in hma an lakna a\anga Bible an ziak \hat chu “Masoretic Text’ (MT) emaw ‘Asher’s Text’ (AT) an vuah a ni. I Lalte 17:4 leh Gen 8:7 – a ‘Choâk’ tihna Oreb chu a hawrawp a inang chiah a. Choâk (Mz), Korak (Greek), Corvus (Latin), Raven (Eng) tih-a lehlin  vek a ni a, chutianga Elija chhang petu Oreb tih leh Nova’n khaw chhin t<ra a thlawhchhuah tir Oreb chu thuhmun a nih avângin Arab (Mihang) chu a thlawh chhuahtir lo tih a chiang a ni.

 

                   Bible pumpuiah hian Choâk (Oreb/Korak) hi \um sawm leh pakhat lai a awm a. (Gen 8:7, Lev 11:15, Deut 14:14, I Lalte 17:4,6, Job 38:41, Sam 147:9, Thuf 30:17, Hlathlan khawm 5:11, Isaia 34:11, Lk 12:24)

 

                    |henkhatin Vulgate (Latin Bible) lamah ‘Arab’ dum tih kawk ni awmin an sawi a, mahse Vulgate-ah pawh ‘Corvus’ Choâk tih a ni tho va. Tin, Solomona Hla thlan khawmah, ‘dum’, ‘hang’, tihna ni awma sawi an awm leh a, chu pawh chu hetiang hi a ni zawk e. Hlathlan khawm 5:11(b)-ah, “A bahsam dum ziar e, Lianâk (Choâk) ang,” Latin-ah, “Nigrae quasi corvus,” Black like Raven (lit) Choâk anga dum tih a ni a, Vulgate-an \anchhan dan pawh hi a fuh chiah lova a ni.

 

                   Tin, Raven [taraph (Heb)] tih chu Choâk anga koham, Sakeibaknei r<m te, Chinghne koham leh rawng sawi nânah te hman a ni bawk a ni. Chungte chu a ruh lang lova sawina (Figurative-ah) a ni a.(Sam 22:13, Lk 11:39, Ezek 22:25). Tichuan Novan Arab a thlawhchhuah tir lovang tih a chiang a, Nova hunah Arab hnam an la awm lo a ni.

 

                   Khawv>la vun rawng inang lote hi English–ho chuan, kawng hnihin an \hen phawk a, ‘White People’ (Mingo) leh ‘Colour People’ mingo ni lo zawng tein, Television lam-ah te Arab ho hmel kan hmu fo \hin a, Mi dum, Choâk anga dum chu an ni lo tih kan hriain, Negro leh Santal ang an ni lo tih kan hmu a. Tichuan, Elija chhang petu chu Choâkte an ni tih hi pawm hmiah ila. Pathian engkim ti thei chuan thilmak a ti \hin tih hi i pawm tlat ang u. Hnialtu chuan, “Masoretic Text an siam chu behchhan chi a ni dawn em ni, Choâk leh Arab tih thuah chuan” an ti pawh a ni mai thei a, ‘Choâk’ tih hi Hebrai Bible an Re-write hma daih Septuagint leh Vulgate-ah pawh, ‘Korak’ leh ‘Corvus’ – ‘Choâk’ tih a lo ni tawh reng a ni tih hi thudik a ni a, Masoretic Text hi AD 900 v>la hmalak 1520 a an hman chauh a ni a, Septuagint phei chu BC 170 hmalam thil daih tawh a mi a ni. Chuvângin Septuagint (LXX) leh Vulgate-ah pawh ‘Choâk’ tih a lo ni tawh a nih chu!

 

                   Tin, ‘Arab’ tih thumal tak hi chu Bible-ah vawi 5 a awm a, Arabian, tih te erawh hi chu a awm nual a, Arabia, Arabian Sea vela hnamte erawh chu an ni ngei a. “Novan Arab a thlawhchhuahtir a,” tih erawh chu a awm lo hulhual a ni. Kan sawi tak ang khân, Arab ho hi Colour People, Non-white people (mingo ni lo) zinga chhiar tel pawh ni ta se, midum (Black) chu an ni lo va ni.

 

                    THILMAK:    Thilmak/thiltihmak Pathianin a tih \hinte hi sawi bo chi a ni lo. Thil tih mak hi Lal Isua pawn a neiin mitthite a kaitho a ni zawk a ni (Joh 11:43). Amah zuitute pawhin thil mak/chhinchhiahna thilmak, an ti ve bawk \hin a ni, tun thleng hian. Israel zawlneite hrilhlawknate leh tunlai zawlneite thil thleng tur an puante hi khaikhinin i zir chiang ang u. (Rf. Ezek 14:6)

 

                   Chutiang ni mahse thiltihmakte (Miracles) hi rin vek t<r a ni lem lo, Isua hminga Ramhuai hnawtchhuakte pawh ama mi ni lo an awm dâwn, “Lalpa i hmingin thute kan hril a, i hmingin ramhuaite kan hnawtchhuak a, thilmakte kan ti \hin lovem ni?” an la ti ang. Chumi hnuah chuan, “Nangni thilsual titute u ka hre ngai lova che u, ka hn>n ata kal bo daih rawh u,” tiin anni chu a la hrilh ang (Matthaia 7:22,23). “In zingah zawlnei emaw mang neih chingin emaw thil mak tak tak leh chhinchhiahnate hrilhlawk che u se la, an hrilhlawk ang thil mak tak tak leh chhinchhiahnate chu thleng dik \hin mahse, ngaihven suh u. ‘Tirawh u Pathian dang biak t<r i zawng ang; in la hriat ngai lohte rawng i bawl ang,’ ti mahse chutiang ti zawlnei leh mang neih chingte thu chu bengkhawn suh ang che u.” (Deut 13:1-3) tih thu Bible-ah kan hmu a ni.

 

                   Diabola hian thil lo thleng t<rte a hre lawk a, “Hun tiam thlen hmaa min nghaisa t<rin i lo kal em ni?” (Mat 8:29) “Diabola chu inhn>nah a lo chhuk tak avângin in chung a pik e, hun tlemte chauh a nei tih a inhriat avangin a thinur >m >m a ni (Thup 12:12). Heng thuah-te hian a mite thil lo thleng tur a hriatlawktir thei tih hria i la. Bible thute hi a hre ve hle a ni. (Math 4:1-11)

 

                   “Farawa chuan an rama mifingte leh dawivaihthiamte chu a ko va, anniho chuan mitdawivaihin a tih ang chuan an ti ve ta mai a, an tiang chu an tluk a, r<lah a chang ve ta mai a, mahse Arona tiang (rula chang) chuan anniho chu a dawlh ta vek a.” (Exodus 7:11) Rf. vv 22. 8:7). Tichuan, Ringtu tak tak leh tak taklo fiah nân Setanan thilmak a mite a tihtir thei ve thovin, thil lo thleng t<rte a hriat lawk ve avângin a mite a hrilhlawktir ve thei tih hi i hria ang u. Pathianin thilmak a ti \hin tih leh a mite pawh a tihtir \hin tih hi a pawmawm a, chutih rual chuan Setana leh a mite pawhin an tive thei tih hi hria i la. A mak Pathian lovin thilmak sawi nin theih loh Kalvari chanchin hi i buaipui zawkin i thupui zawk ang u.

 

                   “Luite tui chu i tlân anga, nangmah chawmtu turin Choâkte chu thu ka pe tawh e…………. Choâkte chuan chhang leh sa an rawn laksak ziah \hin a,” (I Lalte 17:4-6)

 

Note: Choâkte       Orebim (Heb) Korakas(Greek) Corvisque(Latin) Ravens/Crows

(English).

          Dum             Sakhur(Heb) Niger(Lat) Melas(Greek) Black (Eng)

 

                   A bahsam dum ziar e. Lianâk ang – “Palmarum nigrae quasi Corvus – (Lat) His locks are wavy, and black as a raven” (NKJV)

 

Bibliography                   :            1. Vulgate By Jerome

                                                      2. English     - Latin Dictionary

                                                      3. The Septuagint  (Lxx)

                                                      4. OT. Hebrew      

📙 'NAZARET MI

Text: Matthew 2: 22-23.

Nimahsela, Arkelausa chu a pa Heroda aiawhin Judai ramah a lal tih a hriatin chuta kal a hlau ta a; a mumanga hrilha a awm avàngin Galili lamah a kal ta daih a, khaw pakhat Nazaret an tihah chuan a va awm ta a: “Ani chu ‘Nazaret mi’ an ti ang,” ti-a, zàwlneite kâa an sawi kha a lo thlen theih nân.

Nazareth hi Isua nu leh pate khua a ni (Lk 1.26; 2.4,5). Nazaret chu netzer ațanga phuah, a awmzia chu ‘chawr chhuak, țiak, țo, țhang, dawk, zîkno'_tihna a ni. Mi țhenkhatin ‘pâr, êng’_ tihna niin an ring bawk.

 Thuthlung Hlui, Talmud, Midrash leh Flavius Josephus-a lehkhabûahte Nazaret a lang miah lo; Thuthlung Tharah erawh chuan Chanchin Țha bu 4-ah vawi 22, Tirhkohte Thiltihah vawi 7 (total=29) a lang a, lehkhathawn lamah a lang miah lo thung.

♎Isua hun lai Nazareth chu thingtlâng khaw tê, kulh nei tham lo, Zebulun leh Naphtali ram, Jentail-ten an hual vêl, khaw te sual a nih avànga “Nazaret khuaah thil țha a chhuak thei em ni?” tih hlawh (cf. Jn 1.46); chutiang khaw nêp chu ni mah se Isua seilenna, a hmingah pawh ‘Nazareth Isua’ tih hlawh phah khua a ni tlat!

 Isua hun laia Nazaret khaw dung chu minute 10 vêlah a pal tlang theih a, mihring pawh 300/400 lo liam an chêng lo ang; tûnlai Nazareth erawh chu Israel rama Kristian tamna ber, mi 81,410 (2011 Census) chènna a ni.

✔He khaw tê tak tê-ah hian Isua chu kum 30 vêl a chên hnûah rawngbâwlin a chhuak ta a; miten a chanchin an sawiin ‘Nazareth Isua’ an ti țhin.

 🕵 Kraws-a khen beha kha ‘Nazareth Isua’ a ni a; vàna lâwn chhoa lo la kal leh tùra pawh ‘Nazareth Isua’ tho a ni. ‘Nazaret Isua’ hi țhian țha berah i neih ang u.

‘YES WE CAN'

- Andrew Fanai-

Kum 1972 daih tawh khan United Farm Workers (UFW) ho chuan an hotupa Cesar Chavez-a hovin Phoenix, Arizona ah ni 24 chhung chawnghei-in America sorkar in Farming chungchanga a policy an protest a; chuta an auhla (slogan) chu "Sí se puede" (Spanish for "Yes, it can be done") tih a ni. 2008 a Democrats US Presidential candidate Barak Obama chutih laia Senator chuan New Hampshire Democratic Primary Election-ah chuan he thupui zul hian ‘Yes we can’ (Lehlin kher pawh a tul lem em ni?) slogan chu a rawn phawrh (launched) veleh ta a. America ram hian ‘CHANGE’ a mamawh a, chu chu kan thlen tir thei a ni (Yes we can), tiin a rawn au chhuak ta a ni. Obama hian a Presidential campaign chhung zawng khan a secondary slogan ah a hmang anih kha. Chu slogan hmang chuan February 2, 2008 chuan Black Eyed Peas member will.i.am chuan Dipdive.com leh Youtube ah ‘Yes We can’ (We can ‘08) music video pawh chu a rawn released ve leh ta bawk a. Bob Dylan fapa Jesse Dylan’n rawn produced sakin first-ever Emmy Award for Best New Approaches in Daytime Entertainment a rawn hlawh chhuak ta hial anih kha.

Vawiinah chuan English thufing ‘Engmah hi theih loh a lo awm love” (Nothing is impossible) chu ‘A theih loh ti ti chu an daw duai’ (Impossible is nothing) hian a rawn thlak ta daih a. ‘Ka thei ani’, Yes We Can kan ti dawn ani. Pathianin Chakna, theihna (Potential), damna, finna, talent, remhriatna (creativity) min pe a, ka thei lovang hei hi chu(h)…ti a thalaite kan tlanchhe thin ka hmuh hian ka rilru a na thin. Vawiinah hian he editor ziakfung ka kuta dah anih ruala ka rilru-a lut hmasa ber chu Rahsiveng thalaite hi he chanchinbu hmang hian engtinnge Thupui-bulfuk (Principles-lehlin pawh a har hle mai- hmakhawthlir te pawh ti ila, goals, visions, dreams etc.) nei tura kan chawhthawh (inspired) ang a, chu kan thupui-bulfuk chu hlenchhuak turin ‘Yes we can’…tih auhla hi kan chemkawm atana inhmantir hi kumin a ka vision a ni.

Thalai tam tak te hi chuan naktuk pawh hi kan thlir pha meuh awm love, kan tal talin kan tal ve mawp mawp a, kan lum lumin kan lum a, kan ei ve leh teuh a, ‘thawhchhuah nei lo ei thla duak’ tih zawng zawng kan neih zova, a fuh lo a ni. ‘Tihtur neih loh hi Setana hmanraw tha ber a ni’ (Idleness is the devil’s workshop) tiin sap thufing chuan a sawi a. Tihtur ka neih lohna chhan chu hmathlir(dreams & visions) ka nei miau lova, thupui-bulfuk (principles) ka nei lova, ‘Cest la vie’ (This is life- ka nun alawm) tiin chapo takin neih nei chuang si lovin midang chanchin kan sawi peih em em a, ‘Future a bright lo em mai’.

William Carey-a, Khawvel missionary ropui ber a chhal ngam (Pioneer of Modern Missionary Movement) chuan a thupui atan ‘Pathian tan thil ropui tak tih tum la, a hnen atangin thil ropui beisei rawh’ (Attempt great things for God and Expect great things from Him) tih chu a nun khalhtu atan a hmang tlat a, India ram tana a thilpek (education, social reforms, agriculture, printing, translation etc) tluka hlu hi tuman India a la pe ngai lo an ti hial a ni. Beidawnna ruam ah, thihna thlan thim atang pawhin ‘Yes I can’, a ti tlat a, hetiang hlawhtlinna hi a tawpah chuan a khum ta hial a nih kha.

Thalai Kristiante ngat phei hi chu Paula hian min cho(challenge) nasa hle in ka hre thin, ‘Min tichaktu Krista-ah chuan engkim ka ti thei ani’ an ti thlawt mai a (I can do- a ti mai lova- all things a ti tawp mai a ni). Mihring tak pawha miin ‘ka thei ani’ an tih ngam chuan Krista ah chuan engmah hi huphurhawm a lo awm love. Chuvangin, thalaite’n Krista kan zuina kawngah tum mumal (Principles) nei ila, kan zirna kawngah, kan thiltih engkimah, kan hnathawhnaah thupuibulfuk nei ila, BRTF hovin ‘We dreams, we envisions and everyone enjoys’ an tih thin ang leh Martin Luther King Jr. in “I have a dream” a ti ang hian tum mumal neiin chumi chauh chu tinzawn (focus) ta ila. Kan tum tihlawhtling tur hian Krista-ah chuan ‘Kan hneh dawn ani, kan ti thei dawn ani ‘Yes we can’ tih vawng tlatin hmatiang in sawn dawn teh ang.

IMMANUEL

Text:    Matt. 1:23

Mizote hian naupiang hming kan sak hian, an hming awmzia leh anmahni a inpersan fo thin, thuhriltu tam tak ten an sawi kan hre fo tawhin a rinawm. Mahse kan sawi tur Immanuela erawh hi chu chutiang a ni ve tlat lo. A hming awmzia leh a nihna hi a in hmeh thlap mai a ni. Immanuela tih hi Bible ah hian vawi 3 a chuang a, (Is. 7:14; 8:8; Matt. 1:23). Immanuela chu Hebrai hming ani a, mimal hming aiin nihna hming a kawk zawk mah a, a awmzia chu ‘Kan hnenah Pathian a awm’ tiin kan hre fo a, a dik lo, ‘Kan hnena Pathian awm’ tihna a ni. Kan hnena Pathian awma chu Mosia hnenah a inpuang a, Yahweh (Hebrai ho chuan Tetragrammaton an tia, Pathian hming chu an lam ri ngam ngai lova, YHWH tiin an ziak thin) ka ni tiin (Ex. 20:1-3, Is. 42:8, Deut. 6:4,5). Mizo tawnga Yahweh kan lehlin dan ah chuan AWMA tiin kan dah a. Chumi awmzia chu hmana awm, tuna awm, leh nakinah pawh awm tihna ani. Mahse ngun taka chhut chuan hun thu hnuaia lengte’n kan hrilhfiahna mai a ni a, ama nihna a ni lo, Alpha leh Omega-a (Thup. 1:8) chu englai pawha chatuan ata chatuana Imanuela a ni tawp mai.

Awma chu amah avanga khawvel awm, khawvel lo awm theihna hi amah ani a, tun thlenga thil siam zawng zawng awm zel theihna, hi amah a ni. Awma lo chuan nunna a awm thei lova, khawvel hun inher a awm thei lo. Amah awma lo chuan tumah a awm theih loh, pangpar a par lova, rah chhuah a awm thei hek lo, awma lo chuan eng leh thim a awm lova, chhun leh zan a awm thei hek lo. Kan tana pawimawh ber chu Immanuela nena englai pawha inzawm reng hi a ni a. Immanuela/awma nen hian enge kan inzawmna, eng chen nge relationship kan neih tih hi i inzawt theuh ang u. Awma chu kan hnena Pathian awm a ni, kan hnena awm reng chu i pawl thar zel ang u. Immanuela chu kan tana lo piang Isua hi a ni. (Matt. 1:23).

MY SERMON on V'DAY

Exegetical Sermon on: Philippians 3:12-21

14^th.February.2010 (Sun) V’Day

Philippians: Paul's Joy in Christ

A Missionary Prayer Letter

(1)     The Philippians sent Paul at least four gifts to support his ministry (II Cor. 8:3-4; II Cor. 11:8-9; Phil. 4:10-14, 15-16). Paul is overjoyed with the encouragement and remembrance of their love for him and his love for them. Philippi was Paul’s pride and joy. Arms of friendship extended between Paul and the believers at Philippi that didn’t exist in the other churches. None of his other letters has such abundant expressions of tender personal dedication and benevolence as this letter. The letter is filled with expressions of gratitude and thankfulness for their expression of love and faithfulness which he has received on several occasions. Therefore, he can share from his heart his personal convictions and his internal conflicts about the future. It is filled with joy, peace and thanksgiving. The words "joy," "rejoicing," "rejoice" is repeated 16 times in these short 104 verses.

(2)     It was written from prison in the city of Rome (1:7, 13; 4:22). Paul refers to his imprisonment in 1:7, 13, 14; 2:17. According to Acts he was a prisoner at Philippi (16:23, Jerusalem (21:33ff), Caesarea (23:25) and Rome (28:16, 30, 31). Paul was in prison two years while at Caesarea, however no final decision in his case was ever expected there. He was in prison at Rome for two years, pending his appeal to Caesar.

If Lightfoot is correct, and his arguments are very solid, the letter was probably written before Ephesians, Colossians and Philemon, about a year after he arrive in Rome, between 62 and 63 A. D. as recorded in Acts 28:30. If the imprisonment of Paul began between the years 58-60, and ended before the burning of Rome in A. D. 64, logically the epistle would have been written during the time between this period.

3:12-14 Press On Towards It:

(1)     You will find a number of Christians today who claim to have attained sinless perfection. "I haven't sinned since 1978," they claim. Well, they certainly have - they just lied to you!

Remember that John wrote,

1John 1:8-10 If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

There is no way to be sinless while we are in these mortal bodies.

Remember, Rom. 14:23 ...whatever is not from faith is sin.

Paul on the verge of his death still claims that he wasn't there yet. He knew he was far from perfect. But he kept pressing on, kept persevering in the Christian walk.

(2)     Saying-Well begun is half done, but according to Paul, reaching the goal, pressing and striving forward to reach the goal is much more important. Illustration: I can run long distance…Marathon race, maybe we start very well and we are in the first front till the first 15 kms, but in marathon race we have to run 26 kms. So, they never give away the prize to someone who leads very well in half of the race, but the prize will be gone to the people who reached their destinations, goals well.

He uses the descriptive language of someone striving forward, pressing on, and reaching out. You can picture a hiker trying to make it to the peak of a mountain. A runner trying to make it to the end of a marathon. A swimmer trying to cross the English channel. An Olympic cyclist trying to win the race. Whatever illustration you keep in your mind, the words hold true: Rick Warren’s devotional book ‘Purpose Driven Life’ always touch me, we are all created for a special reason and everyone has to have a goals, a purpose in our processes of ministry.

(3)     Forget what lies behind. There is no bigger defeat than to dwell on what you have already past, how many miles you've already gone, how many steps you've already taken. Paul says that he was forgetting what lay behind and kept reaching forward.

This is how to avoid a trap in our Christianity. I have met a lot of people that say, "Oh yeah, I gave my life to Jesus back in the 60's. I was filled with the Spirit in 1974. I used to do street evangelism. But where are you doing now? You see, the past doesn't matter - it's already past. Are you growing in Christ now? Are you ministering now? Are you praying now? You can't rest on your laurels. What matters is where you're at in the Lord today.

The old saying goes, "Winners never quit, and quitters never win." Don't talk about what you did last year, ask yourself, "What am I doing this year?" Don't rest on the growth you experienced in the '90's. Ask yourself, "How much am I growing now?" Remember, Phil. 1:6 ...He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus. God wants you to keep growing, to keep serving Him.

3:15-16 Attitudes

Well, if Paul hadn't yet become perfect, but wrote, "as many as are perfect," then what is he talking about? This is a different form of the word "perfect." Whereas before, Paul was talking about being perfectly completed, this time he is talking about being perfectly in the right place.

“When a baby boy is born, they weigh him, measure him, and take all his vital signs. If everything is as it should be, they say, "Congratulations, your child is perfect!" But ten years later, if your sons weighs 9 pounds, is bald, weak, and crying, something is terribly wrong. He was perfect for his age, for the state he was in. But that is not a completed perfection, it is a growing perfection. So before, Paul said, "I'm not there yet - I'm far from being perfectly completed." But then he was able to turn around and say, "Some of you are in a perfect place in your walk, in your growth. You're just where you should be today."

The people who are in that place should have the attitude of pressing on to the next step, to keep growing in God. A desire for continual growth is what Paul speak about here.

The Lord will not let you stagnate in your spiritual life without prompting.

When Adam fell into sin, the Lord entered the garden and asked him,

Gen. 3:9 ...“Where are you?” When Elijah ran away in fear and was hiding out in a cave, the Lord came to him and said,

1Kgs. 19:9 ...“What are you doing here, Elijah?”

Jesus asked His disciples, Luke 6:46 “...why do you call Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ and do not do what I say?"

Maybe the Lord has seen your attitude this evening - no desire to grow up into spiritual maturity, completely content with where you are. The Lord challenge us today - "Where are you? What are you doing here? Why do you call Me Lord if you won't do what I say?"

3:17-19 The Good And Bad Examples

We have talked in the past about the necessity of imitating the faith of people who are like Jesus. The writer of Hebrews said,

Hebr. 13:7 Remember those who led you, who spoke the word of God to you; and considering the result of their conduct, imitate their faith.

Today, we see these people in the form of those who are selling "cheap grace." Those who say, "Since I'm saved by grace, I can do what I want. All things are lawful for me." Paul's doctrine says right here that their end is destruction. They have fooled themselves. Christ died to forgive sin, not to give us a license to commit it.

How can you know if you're deceiving yourself? How can you make sure that you're not an enemy of the cross of Christ? Look at the descriptions Paul uses: Their God is their appetite. Do you live your life to serve your appetites for money, power, or sex? Do you follow after whatever you desire, no matter whether it's right or wrong?

He also says that their glory is their shame.

Finally, he says that their minds are set on earthly things. Where is your focus? Are you consumed with the things of this world? The cares and desires of this life? God doesn't want you to waste your precious life obsessing about the matters and pleasures of this life - it's so temporary. Is money your focus? Is it sports? Is it success? If your mind is set on this earth, you're in a bad place as a Christian, because this isn't supposed to be your permanent residence.

It is the enemies of the cross who have their minds set on earthly things. We must remember that we are not of this earth. The writer of Hebrews lists great people that had great faith in God, and then says that they...

Hebr. 11:13-14 ...confessed that they were strangers and exiles on the earth. For those who say such things make it clear that they are seeking a country of their own. This world is not our home. We are aliens, strangers, pilgrims, and sojourners in it. We are people passing through. People who are traveling don't pack heavy. They don't get weighed down. They only bring what they need, and they accomplish their purpose.

We are too weighed down, too over-burdened. Many of us have forgotten our purpose for being here. It is to grow in Christ and lead people to Him. It is not to find fame and fortune.

3:20-21 Heavenly Citizenship

Our citizenship is in heaven, not here.

Col. 1:13 For He delivered us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son Jesus Christ is coming back to this earth to take us to heaven.

When you are waiting at the airport, how much thought do you give to making yourself comfortable for the long-term? Do you look around for the ideal place to set up a tent? Do you attempt to establish long-term residency? Of course not - it's simply a stop-over, a place you are temporarily in, but you're headed home. Most of us need this new perspective in relation to this earth.

Jesus Christ is coming soon, to bring us home. Are you watching and waiting?

A THEOLOGICAL APPROACH TO POLITICS

Politics is an important issue in the world today. And we are surrounded by the presence of politics in the news and in our daily lives.  How should Christians approach the issue of politics? What issues need to be made important? Should we stick with a party vote? Can we serve God by working for the values of His Kingdom in our country’s politics? In this paper I will look at what theological methods we can use to begin answering these questions.

            What authorities should Christians use to tell us how to vote and live in our political world? For Christians the ultimate authority is God. He has the first and the last say in our lives, and how we should lead them. God has given us several sources of authority in order to study Him. According to teachings of John Wesley, God has given us four different sources of authority for doing theology: the Scriptures, the Church, reason, and our experiences. This is referred to as the Wesleyan Quadrilateral.

God has given us His Word in the Scriptures to guide and teach us. Thus, God’s Word, the Bible, is the authority many Christians turn to first (and with good reason). The Bible is God’s specific revelation to us. It is “God-breathed.” We can use the commands given in the Bible to guide us in how we vote and interact in politics. For example, one can know that one of the Ten Commandments is “Thou shall not kill.” A person who believes we must follow this command and who believes in the sanctity of human life because we are made in the image of God (Genesis 1:27) might use this authority to form their opinions about the issue of abortion.

            Scripture also has words to say about how we should respect our government. Romans 13:1 says, “Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God” (NIV). In Jeremiah, God is speaking to His people who have been exiled to a pagan land (which some may compare to the United States today…) and He encourages them to support the government there anyway. “And work for the peace and prosperity of the city where I sent you into exile. Pray to the Lord for it, for its welfare will determine your welfare” (Jeremiah 29:7 NLT). Even when we are living in a godless nation, we are commanded to pray for our nation. But there are instances where we are given the example to defy the authority of government when it clashes with the authority of God (Acts 4:19, Exodus 1:17). God’s authority must come first, but in the majority of cases we are to submit to the authority of our government.

            According to Wesley’s quadrilateral method of theology, another source of authority is the Church, and the traditions held within it. When we are seeking guidance for politics, it is difficult to find straight answers in our churches in these modern days. Churches are just as divided politically as any other group. And if we look to the tradition of the church, this doesn’t really help because back when the Church was united, the political system wasn’t anything like what it is today and they don’t really deal with the same issues. But a person can always turn to their church for guidance on issues, drawing on the knowledge of spiritual leaders who might be able to direct them towards God’s will on a matter.

            Another source of authority is our sense of reason and logic. This is a big one in politics, because for many in the secular world, reason is the ultimate source of authority. Christians should use their reason to back up the authority of Scripture and the Church, but we must remember that the authority of God (as passed down through the Scriptures and His Church) must carry a greater weight in our decisions than our reason, which is ultimately flawed because we are fallen creatures. But reason is still a gift from God and a valid source of authority. For example, one could use their powers of reasoning to arrive at an opinion about an economic issue. We may see all the options and use our reason to anticipate the implications of all the alternatives in order to arrive at the best one. Reason can lead us to the decision that would be best for our nation and most honoring to God.

            The last source of authority in Wesley’s quadrilateral is our experience. This is the most subjective and personal source of the four, so although it is a valid source of authority, it is probably the one we should be most wary of. Many people will vote on a certain issue because of how it directly pertains to them in the workplace or in life. In this case, they are using their experience as a basis for their political view.

One can also turn to natural theology to direct their political views. Natural theology is how God has revealed himself to the world in general, through nature or anything else in His creation. For example, we see God’s creation all around us—that which He called good. These observations may influence our views about environmental issues. We might see God’s beautiful creation and know that it is something that needs to be preserved.

As we have seen, we have been given many different sources of authority by God with which we can use to form our opinions about many different issues. Even still, Christians may disagree on a number of issues, because they may try to solve them with different sources of authority. Or even using the same kinds of authority may still lead to differing opinions. It is up to us to discern what God’s will is for a situation based on all the decision-making tools he has provided us with. Maybe we will never know what is ultimately right for an issue in this life. But we can certainly use all our resources to try to discover that.

           

JESUS DIVINITY & HUMANITY?

How can a person have a divine nature and a human nature at the same time in the way that we believe Jesus Christ did?

One of the great crises in evangelical Christianity today is a lack of understanding about the person of Christ. Almost every time I watch Christian television I hear one of the classical creeds of the Christian faith being denied blatantly, unknowingly, unwittingly. And of course, part of the reason is that it is so difficult for us to understand how one person can have two natures. You are asking me the question, 'How?' I don't know how; I know that Jesus is one person with two natures. How can that be? Long before there was a human nature there was a second person of the Trinity. Here the second person of the Trinity, very God of very God, God himself, was able to take upon himself a human nature. No human being could reverse the process and take upon himself a divine nature. I cannot add deity to my humanity. It's not as if Christ changed from deity into humanity. That's what I hear all the time. I hear that there was this great eternal God who suddenly stopped being God and became a man. That's not what the Bible teaches. The divine person took upon himself a human nature. We really can't understand the mystery of how this happened. But it is conceivable, certainly, that God, with his power, can add to himself a human nature and do it in such a way as to unite two natures in one person.

The most important council about this in the history of the church, whose decision has stood for centuries as the model of Christian orthodoxy and is embraced by Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists, Roman Catholics, Baptists -- virtually every branch of Christendom -- is the Council of Chalcedon. It was held in the year 451, in which the church confessed its belief about Jesus in this way: They said that we believe that Jesus is verus homus, verus Deus -truly man, truly God. Then they went on to set boundaries for how we're to think about the way in which these two natures relate to each other. They said that these two natures are in perfect unity, without mixture, division, confusion, or separation. When we think about the Incarnation, we don't want to get the two natures mixed up and think that Jesus had a deified human nature or a humanized divine nature. We can distinguish them, but we can't tear them apart because they exist in perfect unity.

When Paul wrote that Jesus emptied himself and became a servant and yet he was God, in what ways did he retain or not retain his powers of being God?

The concept of 'emptying' was a raging controversy in the nineteenth century, and elements of it remain today. The Greek word used by Paul in the second chapter of Philippians, kenosis, is translated as 'emptying' in most Bible versions. The question is, Of what did Jesus, in his human (incarnate) state, empty himself?

The popular view in certain circles in the nineteenth century was that at the time of the Incarnation, the eternal God, the second person of the Trinity, laid aside -- emptied himself of -- his divine attributes so that he could become a man. And in becoming a man in the very real sense, he stopped being God. And so there is the transformation from deity to humanity because he set aside his omniscience, his omnipotence, his self-existence, and all of those other attributes that are proper to the nature of God.

There was on orthodox theologian during the middle of that controversy who said somewhat caustically that the only emptying that theory proved was the emptying of the minds of theologians who would teach such a thing as God stopping for one second to be God. If God laid aside one of his attributes, the immutable undergoes a mutation, the infinite suddenly stops being infinite; it would be the end of the universe. God cannot stop being God and still be God. So we can't talk properly of God laying aside his deity to take humanity upon himself. That is why orthodox Christianity has always declared that Jesus was verus homus, verus Deus -- truly man, truly God; fully man and fully God. His human nature was fully human, and his divine nature always and everywhere was fully divine.

Nevertheless, the apostle Paul does speak of Christ emptying himself of something. I think the context of Philippians 2 makes it very clear that what he emptied himself of was not his deity, not his divine attributes, but his prerogatives -- his glory and his privileges. He willingly cloaked his glory under the veil of this human nature that he took upon himself. It's not that the divine nature stops being divine in order to become human. In the Transfiguration, for example (Matthew 17:1-13), we see the invisible divine nature break through and become visible, and Jesus is transfigured before the eyes of his disciples. But for the most part, Jesus concealed that glory. I think Paul is saying in Philippians 2 that we're to imitate a willingness to relinquish our own glory and our own privileges and prerogatives.

GREAT IS THY FAITHFULNESS

(Biblical Perspectives on the faithfulness of God)

-Andrew L Fanai, M.Th I 

(I wrote this article for the college News Letter 'The Bridge' on 9th September 2008)

In the business world, human’s word is, with exceedingly rare exceptions, no longer his/her bond. In the social world, marital infidelity abounds on every hand, the sacred bonds of wedlock being broken with as little regard as the discarding of an old garment. In the ecclesiastical realm, thousands who have solemnly covenanted to preach the truth make no scruple to attack and deny it. Nor can reader or writer claim complete immunity from this fearful sin: in how many ways have we been unfaithful to Christ, and to the light and privileges which God has entrusted to us! But there is one, one who is faithful, faithful in all things, faithful at all times-GOD.

Scripture abounds in illustrations of God’s faithfulness. God is true. His Word of Promise is sure. In all His relations with His people God is faithful. He may be safely relied upon. No one ever yet really trusted Him in vain. We find this precious truth expressed almost everywhere in the Scriptures, for His people need to know that faithfulness is an essential part of the Divine character. This is the basis of our confidence in Him. But are we really counting on His fulfillment of His promises? Are we actually expecting Him to do for us all that He has said? Are we resting with implicit assurance on these words, "He is faithful that promised" (Heb. 10:23)?

God is faithful in preserving His people:

 "God is faithful, by whom you are called unto the fellowship of His Son" (1 Cor. 1:9). In the previous verse promise was made that God would confirm unto the end His own people. The Apostle’s confidence in the absolute security of believers was founded not on the strength of their resolutions or ability to persevere, but on the veracity of Him that cannot lie. Since God has promised to His Son a certain people for His inheritance, to deliver them from sin and condemnation, and to make them participants of eternal life in glory, it is certain that He will not allow any of them to perish.

God is faithful in disciplining His people:

 He is faithful in what He withholds no less than in what He gives. He is faithful in sending sorrow as well as in giving joy. The faithfulness of God is a truth to be confessed by us not only when we are at ease, but also when we are smarting under the sharpest rebuke. Nor must this confession be merely of our mouths, but of our hearts, too. When God smites us with the rod of chastisement, it is faithfulness which wields it. To acknowledge this means that we humble ourselves before Him, own that we fully deserve His correction, and instead of murmuring, thank Him for it. God never afflicts without reason. Afflictions are necessary for us: "In their affliction they will seek Me early" (Hos. 5:15).

God is faithful in glorifying His people:

God treats with us not on the ground of our merits (for we have none), but for His own great name’s sake. God is constant to Himself and to His own purpose of grace that He called . . . them He also glorified (Rom. 8:30). God gives a full demonstration of the constancy of His everlasting goodness toward His elect by effectually calling them out of darkness into His marvelous light, and this should fully assure them of the certain continuance of it Paul was resting on the faithfulness of God when he said, I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I have committed unto Him against that day (2 Tim 1:12). The Lord knows what is best for each of us, and one effect or resting on this truth will be the silencing of our petulant complaining. The apprehension of this blessed truth will beget increasing confidence in God. "He doeth all things well."

WILLIAM CAREY

[Pic. Index- Carey and his renowned Serampore College]

(I wrote this essay in participating in the Carey's Day Essay Competition last year; I should have won the first prize; but the Judges told me that I exceeded the limited words; otherwise...??? I was a bit exasperated after seeing the award winner's writings...@ndrewLfanai(c))

INTRODUCTION:

"Sit down, young man! When God pleases to convert the heathen,

He will do it without your aid or mine."

This was the response he received from the then Director, Mr. Ryland when young William Carey proposed in the meeting of ministers at Northampton: "The duty of Christians to attempt to spread the Gospel among heathen nations." This idea was then so strange that exclaimed: Not discouraged, Carey wrote a tract containing all the facts that he had gathered on his map. Slowly he got other ministers interested, and at another meeting he preached his great sermon—

"Expect Great Things from God.

Attempt Great Things for God"

His labour was blessed and at last, in 1792, in Kettering, a missionary society was formed. William Carey was one of God's giants in the history of evangelism! One of his biographers, F. Dealville Walker, wrote of Carey: "He, with a few contemporaries, was almost single-handed in conquering the prevailing indifference and hostility to missionary effort; Carey developed a plan for missions, and printed his amazing Enquiry; he influenced timid and hesitating men to take steps to the evangelizing of the world." Another wrote of him, "Taking his life as a whole, it is not too much to say that he was the greatest and most versatile Christian missionary sent out in modern times."

CAREY’S LIFE AND ACHIEVEMENTS:

William Carey, D.D. (1761-1834), orientalist and missionary, was born 17 August 1761 at Paulerspury, Northamptonshire, (England), where his father, Edmund Carey, kept a small free school, to the educational benefit of the boy. At fourteen he was apprenticed to a shoemaker at Hackleton, and becoming religiously affected joined the Baptist connexion in 1783. In 1786 he was chosen minister of the Baptist congregation at Moulton. He had lately married, on so slender an income that meat was a rarity at his table. He was working at Greek, Latin, and Hebrew, chiefly with a view to the interpretation of the scriptures. After holding a ministry at Leicester from 1789 he joined in the movement which culminated in the formation of the Baptist Missionary Society, and was (with a Mr. Thomas) chosen to be the first Baptist missionary to India.

Carey and his family and colleague arrived in Bengal early in 1794, and speedily discovered that Calcutta was not the place for a needy missionary to live in. The small funds they had brought swiftly vanished, and absolutely destitute they set out in an open boat to seek for a refuge. They found it after a forty miles' voyage in the house of a Mr. Short, who afterwards married Mrs. Carey's sister. At first the missionary's intention was to make his living by farming; but on being offered the superintendence of Mr. Udney's indigo factory near Máldah he gladly accepted the post. His letters home at this period express his distress at the postponement of his evangelizing mission, owing to the difficulties presented by the various languages and dialects spoken in Bengal. Carey set himself with determination to overcome this obstacle. In 1795 he established a church near the factory, and there he preached in the vernacular.

After five years' work at Máldah, varied by journeys to Bhutan and Dínájpúr he moved south to the Danish settlement of Serampore, north of Calcutta, following the refusal of the East India Company to grant permission to reside in its territory to a party of BMS recruits who had just arrived in Bengal in 1800.[1] Three young[2] missionaries, together with their families arrived. A school and printing press were the first requisites, and a Bible in Bengali was at once put in hand and duly appeared, together with other versions of the scriptures, in Mahratta, Tamil; in altogether twenty-six languages, besides numerous philosophical works. The Serampore trio built up the work of Serampore to a level which attracted a widespread admiration in Britain and did much to popularize the idea of mission.[3] On December 28, 1800, Carey had the pleasure of baptizing his own son, Felix; then for the first time, the baptismal service was spoken in Bengali, as Krishna Pal thus publicly professed his faith in Christ. As the faithful missionaries continued their work, other natives were added to their Christian church; and opposition arose. But God definitely answered prayer and the enemy's plans were thwarted.

In 1801 Carey was appointed professor of Sanskrit, Bengáli, and Mahratta in the newly founded college of Fort William, and, continuing the pursuit of linguistics and proselytes, published a Mahratta grammar in 1805, and opened a mission chapel in Calcutta in the same year. There was, however, a strong feeling against over-zealous proselytizing as a political danger, and Carey was cautioned to abstain from preaching or distributing tracts for a while, although the government assured him that they were well satisfied with the character and deportment of his missionaries, against whom there were no complaints. In 1807 Mrs. Carey died, after having been violently insane for several years. In spite of her affliction, Carey's love and tenderness toward her never ceased. In spite of such official curbs the mission grew steadily, and in 1814 had twenty stations in India. Dr. Carey had now received the diploma of D.D. actively superintended the work of the mission and its press.

Besides the Indian versions of the scriptures, in which he took a vigorous part, he published grammars of Mahratta (1805), Sanskrit (1806), Punjábi (1812), Telinga (1814), Bhotanta (1826?); dictionaries of Mahratta (1810), Bengáli (1818, 3 vols. ; 2nd ed. 1825; 3rd ed. 1827-30), Bhotanta (1826), and had prepared materials for one of all Sanskrit-derived languages; but these were destroyed in a fire which occurred in 1812 at the press at Serampore. He also edited the 'Ramayana,' in 3 vols. 1806-10, and his friend Dr. Roxburgh's 'Flora Medica,' for he was an excellent botanist.

Through all the forty-one uninterrupted years of Carey's missionary career, his zeal was unabated. But at last his strength failed — the end was drawing near. After being weakened by many attacks of fever he was struck with apoplexy July 1833, and lingered in a feeble state till 9 June 1834. He was thrice married, and left three sons, one of whom was Felix Carey. The last resting-place of the venerable missionary was marked only by a simple epitaph of his own composing:

Wm. Carey

Born, August 17, 1761

Died, June 9, 1834

"A wretched, poor, and helpless worm,

On Thy kind arms I fall."

Forty-one years in India! Reader, the field still needs workers. And the promise is — "He that reapeth receiveth wages, and gathereth fruit unto life eternal." One of his fellow-missionaries wrote of him, "He is ripe for glory and already dead to all that belongs to life."

"Perhaps this is one of the strongest chains with which the devil ever bound the children of men. This is my comfort — that God can break it."

In Carey’s missionary programme, the opening of a charity school was given first priority. The contribution that William Carey and his associates- Joshua Marshman and Ward made towards spreading education through the medium of the Indian languages especially Bengali is laudable. In 1794, a charity school was established at Madnabatty with 40 boys. He had written to his son, “One of the first things to be done will be to open a charity school”. Now, this dream has been realized.[4]. In 1800, a Bengali school was established and the number of schools established by mission eventually rose to 111 with about 10,000 students. The curriculum of these schools included Oriental languages and philosophy in conjunction with western science.[5]
 

Education for Girls was emphasis. At that time in India, girls were not sent to school at all. The Serampore missionaries were sensitive to the lack of female education in this very conservative society. They started to encourage girls to come forward and join the school for education. In 1809 the Serampore missionaries established benevolent institutions in Calcutta where Charity schools for girls and boys were established and there was no restriction to admissions in these schools. By 1830, they had established 23 schools for girls with 582 female students.

Carey’s also written a Multi-lingual dictionary which was written in the style of the celebrated Sanskrit dictionary entitled as Amarkosh. Carey drew up a manuscript of a multilingual dictionary of 13 Indian languages.

---

[1] B. Stanley, “William Carey” in Biographical Dictionary of Evangelicals, Ed. Timothy Larsen (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 2003), 118-121.

[2] The new missionaries were Joshua Marshman and William Ward, whose names will always be associated with that of Carey.

[3] B. Stanley, “William Carey…, 118-121.

[4] Malay Dewanji, William Carey and the Indian Renaissant (New Delhi: ISPCK, 1996), 45.

[5] Malay Dewanji, William Carey and the Indian …46.