Vishal Mangalwadi

--------------------------------
TRUTH AND SOCIAL REFORM
(Third Edition)

Good Books

Third Edition : Copyright © 1996 by Vishal Mangalwadi

First Edition by Nivedit Good Books Distributors Pvt. Ltd. 1985

Second Edition by Spire (Hodder and Stoughton), London 1989
NOTE: Steve M. Spaulding has done substantial typographical/formatting/editing on this downloaded version—
into Word for Windows (from the Vishal Mangalwadi web-site) which may not be entirely complete nor
compatible with the author‘s original layout, but which should aid the reader overall. I have also noticed that the
web version does not include some key (c. 7) footnotes/sources (which are asterisked in this text). They are
included here fyi.
Published by:
Nivedit Good Books Distributors Pvt. Ltd.

Orders & Correspondence:

Ivy Cottage
Landour,
Mussoorie (U.P.) 248 179
India

Registered Address:
58 Mandakini Enclave
Kalkaji, New Delhi 110019
India

Distributed in North America by:

The McLaurin Institute
331 Seventeenth Avenue SE
Minneapolis, MN 55414
USA
US +1 8005828541 Call

ISBN 81-86701-003

Dedicated to
Prabhu & Phillipa Guptara
whose friendship has always been self-sacrificing

Other Books By Vishal Mangalwadi

The World of Gurus

When The New Age Gets Old: Looking For A Greater Spirituality
Missionary Conspiracy: Letters To A Postmodern Hindu
Carey, Christ & Cultural Transformation
(co-authored with Ruth Mangalwadi)
Contents

Preface to the Third Edition 5

Introduction to the British Edition 8

1 Compassion and Social Reform: Jesus the Troublemaker 9

2 Evangelism and Social Reform: All Things New 23

3 Sin, Salvation and Social Reform: A New Man in Christ 36

4 The Holy Spirit and Social Reform: You Shall Receive Power 56

5 The Church and Social Reform: Shepherds for the Sheep 69

6 Christian Hope and Social Reform: A Faith that Overcomes the World 81

Appendix One: 91
You can Serve The Poor Without Giving Away Your Money

Appendix Two: 95
A Worldview for World-Healing

Credits 101
PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION

I was angry when I first read Jenny Taylor's comments (printed on the back-cover) about this
book. Because the British are not known for making overstatements, I assumed that the
comment must have been made to Jenny by some Indian friend of mine. A few days later,
quite providentially, I ran into her. We were in England, I was wearing Indian clothes, and she
had seen my pictures, so in a crowd of 30,000 she called my name and introduced herself.
Eschewing formalities, I confronted her about the embarrassment she had caused me by
painting a larger-than-life picture. Jenny insisted that no Indian but she herself had made the
statement and that having surveyed the relevant literature available today she stood by her
opinion. She argued that as an editor\reviewer she had as much right to praise a book as she
had to criticize it, and added that she is sorry that the book is out of print.

It may have remained out of print but for another providential encounter. This time it was
with a gentleman from South Africa. He saw some of my other books on a book-table outside
a church, pulled out a copy of the British edition of Truth and Social Reform from his bag,
and asked the „salesgirl‟, “Do you have any copies of this book? It changed my life a few
years ago when I found it in my country. Since then I have searched for it in many book-
shops to give it as a present to my friends. I have failed. I am visiting India for two weeks and
one of my objectives has been to try and find at least six copies.” The „salesgirl‟ said, “I am
sorry! The two earlier editions of the book have been out of print for a good many years and I
know that the author will never republish the book because he will never find the time to
revise it. But don‟t worry, if the book really means so much to you then I will publish it, with
or without revisions. I am Nivedit, and the author happens to be my father.” I realized that I
owed an apology to Jenny when Nivedit obtained orders for 500 copies, even before the new
edition was advertised!

The central thesis of this book is quite simple: Ideas have social consequences. Great ideas
have lasting consequences. A rediscovery of the Gospel in the Sixteenth Century did not
reform Europe alone, as those true ideas traveled to India they brought about great positive
social changes here as well. In my book Missionary Conspiracy: Letters to a Postmodern
Hindu and in the book co-authored with my wife Ruth, Carey, Christ and Cultural
Transformation, I have looked at some of the biblical beliefs and their social outcome in
India. Truth and Social Reform, written on the battle-front and not in libraries, studies some
basic New Testament themes and their reforming power. Three follow-up books are in the
making: “Rebuilding A Ruined Republic” studies the „post-exile-ic‟ Old Testament books
Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai and Zechariah and draws lessons for our day from Israel‟s
experience of rebuilding “the ancient ruins” after complete disintegration; “The Greatest
Sermon Ever Preached” looks at Jesus‟ Sermon on the Mount as a Social Ethic for today;
and, “The Bible and Civilization In The Second Millennium” argues that the Bible has had
greater impact than any other book in shaping some of the best features of the second
millennium AD.

Raja Rammohan Roy, was the pioneer of the Nineteenth Century “Indian Renaissance” and
the Father of the Hindu social Reform movement. His advocacy of English education helped
usher in the education revolution in India and his opposition to Sati (widow-burning), helped
ban it. Roy said:

The consequences of my long and uninterrupted researches into religious truth

has been that I have found the doctrine of Christ more conducive to moral
principles, and better adapted for the use of rational beings, than any other
which have come to my knowledge.
(quoted by M.C. Parekh, Rajarshi Rammohan Roy, Rajkot 1927, p. 34)

Keshub Chunder Sen, the successor of Raja Rammohan Roy, and the founder of Prarthana
Samaj, was more forthright:

We breathe, think, feel, move in a Christian atmosphere under the influence

of Christian education; the whole mature society is awakened, enlightened,
reformed…our hearts have been touched, conquered, subjugated by a
superior power and that power is Christ. Christ rules British India, and not
the British Government. England has sent us a tremendous moral force, in
the life and character of that mighty prophet, to conquer and hold this vast
empire. None but Jesus ever deserved this bright, precious diadem - India -
and Christ shall have it. (Quoted by M.C. Parekh, Bramarshi Keshub Chunder Sen,
Rajkot, 1931, p.94)

Mahadev Govind Ranade (1842-1906) one of the greatest Hindu reformers at the end of the
Nineteenth Century concurred with his predecessors:

…the love of municipal freedom…the skill of virtues necessary for civil

life…aptitudes of mechanical skill…the love of science and research…the love of
daring and adventurous discovery…the resolution to master
difficulties,…and…the chivalrous respect for womankind… The Christian
civilization which came to India from the West was the main instrument of
renewal. (Quoted by C.F. Andrews, The Renaissance in India: its Missionary aspect, London,
1912, pp138f.)

Mr. Nani Palkhivala, is perhaps the most highly respected legal luminary in India at
present. He argues that modern India owes some of its best features to the British rule:

There is something special, in fact providential, in the relationship between

Britain and India. The crucial test is this: if the last two hundred years in
India‟s history were to be relived, how many thinking Indians would prefer
to have them without British rule? I venture to say that no one, who is not
ignorant or partial, would wish the past to be redrawn effacing all traces of
the Raj.

There was much that was ugly and exploitative in those years. But on balance,
the good far outweighed the evil . . . There were six invaluable gifts which [the
British] bequeathed to us:
It was the accident of British rule which is responsible for the (1) unity and
integrity of India today.... The largesse of the (2) English Language enriched
the Indian culture. It was the cement which bound, and continues to bind, our
country together.… The (3) civil and criminal laws...are based upon English
jurisprudence...The (4) administrative structure in India is still as the British left
it... Not the least of the gifts that the British left behind was the institution of the
(5) armed forces imbued with the tradition of being totally apolitical.... Finally,
if India is a (6) free republic today, that is also the consequence of the British
rule. Indians fought, and fought valiantly, to get rid of foreign domination. But it
is probable that, up to now, India would not have shaken off the domination of
Indian rulers but for the notions of freedom imbibed from the days of British.
(Palkhivala, We the Nation, UBSPD, New Delhi 1994, pp.15-17)

Did the above blessings mentioned by Mr. Palkhivala come to us because of the British
traders, army, or politicians? No, the British East India Company began trading with India in
the early 1600s. Its rule in Bengal began as a destructive phenomenon in 1757. India‟s
reformation started only with the arrival of the Truth of the Gospel at Serampore with the
early missionaries led by William Carey. Historian Hugh Tinker in his classic study South
Asia: A Short History (Macmillan, 1966 & 1989) sums it up:

“And so in Serampore, on the banks of river Hooghly, soon after 1800, the
principle elements in modern South Asia - popular linguistic identification
(„linguism‟), the press, the university, social consciousness - all came to light.
The West and South Asia were about to come to grips with each other in
terms not merely of power and profit, but also of ideas and principles.”

The infusion of true and powerful biblical ideas and principles began India‟s reformation.
Unfortunately, however, in many spheres contemporary Indian society is reverting to its past
evils. This little book, therefore, is being republished with a prayer that the Lord of history
will take it as an offering - as trivial as that of a boy who gave him five loaves and two fish -
and that He will use it to trigger off a new and global reformation movement through
his Church. During the now concluding millennium, the Christian Church has emerged as
the largest and the most resourceful NGO (Non-Governmental Organization). It has
already done more than any other forum to bless our world. The Church of Jesus
Christ is capable of doing much more - all the way from grass roots to global issues. One
factor which inhibits an unleashing of its full potential is the fact that much of the
Church is not even aware of the power of the Truth on which it was founded - power,
both for the salvation of individuals and for the destiny of their nations.

Vishal Mangalwadi
Mussoorie
December 6, 1996
INTRODUCTION

The discovery of truth is explosive, because it calls for major changes in our outlook and
service. I hope that will be a liberating, not a frightening, experience. One basic
assumption of the Protestant Reformation - one of the greatest reform movements of all
times - was that because the Bible is God‟s objective revelation to man, each individual
can read it and know the truth, without blind submission to the Church‟s in fallible
interpretation and traditions. If my interpretations appear to be iconoclastic, it is because
(a) I am going away from some of our traditional understandings, back to the Word
of God and (b) because I assume that the Bible speaks not to our souls, to give us
some religious experience, but to the real world. A world that is really fallen, but can
be reformed.

Three trillion dollars have been spent, since the Second World War, in the effort to
„develop‟ the poor of the Third World. The results, however, have been minimal. Since
1976, my wife, Ruth, and I have had the privilege of being involved with the
development scene on the front line. This experience both shattered our illusion that
there is any easy answer to poverty, and gave insights into the application of Scriptures to
socio-economic realities.

Truth and Social Reform discusses poverty in the context of the supernatural
dimension of reality. It presents biblical insights gained in the heat of experience, in the
hope that it will enrich the reader‟s understanding of Christian faith and service wherever
he or she may live and serve.

Vishal Mangalwadi
March 1989
1

COMPASSION AND SOCIAL REFORM :

JESUS THE TROUBLEMAKER

Compassion for the suffering individual and concern for the glory of God were
undoubtedly the prime motives of Christ's service. But if compassion had meant for Christ
merely what most Christians understood by it today, then Jesus would never have been
killed. He would have been a fit candidate for a Nobel prize, not the cross.

Christ's compassion was prophetic. Instead of being a gut-level response to pictures of

starving children, it grew out of a prophetic insight into the root causes of human
misery. In His response, therefore, Jesus went to the source of suffering and dealt with it.
In this chapter we shall look at three facets of Christ's compassion and service which led to
His death. In an earlier age, when Protestants still believed in social protest, such a
commentary would have been redundant. But today? Well, we have drifted so far from our
Biblical and historical heritage, that it may seem too radical to some people.

Service: A Stirring of a Stagnant Pool

In John 5, Jesus healed a man who had been sick for thirty-eight years. The lame man was
lying near a pool of water. When the waters of the pool were stirred, therapeutic powers
went into action and the sick who entered the water were healed. This was not superstition,
but something the man had been witnessing for decades. If he hadn't seen the healing
powers of those waters, he wouldn't have stayed by the pool for all those years. He was
sick. The treatment was free and within his sight, yet he could not get it. Why not? He
explained to Jesus that he did not have anyone who would put him into the water when it
was stirred. No one cared for him.

Jesus asked this man who had not stood for almost four decades to pick up his mat and
walk. He did. And it was the Sabbath. In Israel, you could forget whether it was Tuesday
or Thursday, but no one ever forgot it was the Sabbath.

Their society was so well organized that in no time the Jewish authorities knew that this
unknown man had dared to break the Sabbatical rule; he had picked up his bed and was
walking. An on-the-spot enquiry began. How efficient ! Was it the beauty of that society?
No, an establishment which didn't care for a man for thirty-eight years was prompt in
caring for its own inhuman rules. I find it hard to believe that they were so keen to enforce
the Sabbath legislation because they wanted to please God. I am more inclined to think
that their real interest was to impose a fine and collect a little extra revenue! The sick man
had complained to Jesus that his problem was that the Jewish society had no compassion.
It hadn't even bothered to enforce a basic etiquette of civilised behaviour: first come, first
served. The resourceful came late, but got healed first.
It was not by mistake that Jesus asked this powerless man to challenge an inhuman society
by a deliberate act of defiance of it‟s rule. God had provided the stirred-up pool of water
for the healing of this man. It was the social pool of a stagnant, selfish society that needed
to be stirred up for his healing. That was precisely what Jesus did. He not only healed the
man, but also asked him to break the Sabbatical rule, which stirred up the Jews and led to
an attempt by the Establishment on Jesus' life (John 5:18).

Does the healing ministry of the Church today, even its community health work, lead
to such retaliation from society? No, because our service does not touch the real issue
at all. Many sick men, women and children in the villages and slums of my country die
daily, not because treatment is not available or is expensive, but simply because no one
cares to take the treatment to them. In some of the villages in my district, young women
die during childbirth, simply because their villages are marooned for two to three months
during the monsoon. We do not even know that they exist until they migrate in desperation
to turn our cities into slums.

The Establishment can send satellites to the sky; but it cannot take simple sanitation to
the dying destitutes in its slums. The Church says it cares, yet so often it does not dare to
expose the selfishness of the elite which is the real cause of the hundreds of basic diseases
which should have been wiped out by now, if only clean water, basic sanitation, adequate
nutrition, health education and immunisation were made available to the poor masses. The
technology and financial resources are available in abundance for taking these services to
the poor. Yet they starve, suffer and die because the powerful have other priorities. The
World Health Organization estimates that the annual loss in India due to sicknesses caused
by contaminated water alone might add up to twenty thousand crores of rupees. Christ's
mercy did not touch the individual alone. It sought to touch the heart of a society. It
sought to awaken the sleeping conscience of society. It troubled the stagnant waters
which brought about a torrent of retaliation from vested interests.

Service: A Judgment of a Blind Society

After He opened the eyes of a beggar who was born blind (John 9), Jesus did not suggest
He was a 'servant', He said, 'I came to this world to judge, so that the blind should see and
those who see should become blind' (John 9:39 GN).

The disciples asked Jesus, 'Rabbi who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born
blind?'

This question seems to have hurt Jesus. It is hard to believe that the disciples were asking a
sincere question about the cause of an inexplicable suffering. Certainly Jesus did not think
that they had a profound philosophical interest in the problem of suffering which deserved
an answer. (For a detailed discussion of suffering see the chapter ―Making Sense of
Suffering‖ in my book ―Missionary Conspiracy: Letters to a Postmodern Hindu‖
published by Nivedit Good Books.) Were the disciples really asking, `Rabbi, could you
kindly provide us with some good rationale to justify our indifference to the suffering of
this man?'
True, the man was born blind. But did he have to be a beggar? True, both he and his
parents were sinners. But was Israel justified in ignoring the fact that he was also a human
being made in the image of God, worthy of love and care? He was begging, neither
because he was blind, nor because he was a sinner, but because Israel was blind to the fact
that he was an image-bearer of God, the crown of God's Creation. He was a beggar
because Israel had sinned by not caring for him. Instead of seeing their own sinful
indifference the disciples were more keen on finding out his sin and that of his parents.

Jesus, therefore, sought to open their eyes by His brilliant act of civil disobedience.

The incident in John 5 was not an isolated happening. It was part of Christ's pattern. On
that occasion Jesus had simply asked the sick man to break the Sabbath law. Then in
chapter 9 He did it Himself. In order to open the eyes of this blind man, He did not need to
spit on the ground and make mud with the spit, especially on a Sabbath day when He knew
that it would be seen as `work‟ and therefore a deliberate act of defiance of the
Establishment's laws. Yet, He did it. It was a deliberate provocation of the Establishment.
Jesus also asked the blind man to break the law, `Go and wash your face in the pool of
Siloam' (John 9:7GN). Jesus did not need to do this in order to heal him, but healing him
was not the only objective of Christ‟s service. His objective included exposing the
blindness of the self-righteous Establishment and condemning it publicly. Had not
God commanded Israel in the Old Testament to have mercy on its poor? If Israel was
righteous and obedient, why did this man beg on the streets in order to live?

Civil disobedience is a deliberate and courageous act of a reformer to expose and

condemn the institutionalised evils of his day. That is what Jesus was doing. And the
Establishment was blind enough to be thus exposed. Instead of containing Christ's service
by patronising it, they condemned the healing of a blind man, simply because it was done
on a Sabbath. They excommunicated the man from the synagogue and thereby further
exposed their own blindness. The word was able to see that a mighty prophet had arisen
among them who could open the eyes of a man born blind, yet the Establishment could see
nothing more than the violation of its own petty rules. Its values, its ideals, its attitudes, its
priorities all stood exposed and condemned. The world was able to see that its rulers did
not care for their people, but Christ did. The sheep were able to perceive that Jesus was
their true shepherd who dared to stand against the wolves pretending to be their custodians.

Jesus made the blind man pay a heavy price for his healing. He was excommunicated from
the synagogue because he chose to speak the truth. No doubt, he would have been
welcomed into the community of Christ's disciples, yet his excommunication must have
helped many sincere Jews to make up their minds against their own rulers whose own
blindness had been exposed.

Such service, which judges the world, is not pleasant. The authorities not only
excommunicated the man; they also made it known publicly that Jesus was persona non
grata. Whoever said that Jesus was Christ would be excommunicated. It became harder
to associate with Jesus; being seen around Him could land someone into trouble.
The Association for Comprehensive Rural Assistance (ACRA) was the community with
which I served the rural poor in Chattarpur district of Madhya Pradesh from 1976 till April
1983. We were involved in service which stirred the social pool, which judged the
blindness of the Establishment. When you judge the world, the world retaliates by judging
you. During May 1982, thirty of us were arrested on four different occasions, because we
not only helped the victims of a hail-storm, but also through our service exposed the
insensitivity of the politicians towards the victims of this natural calamity. It is joked in our
area that we get three crops a year: the winter crop, the monsoon crop and the relief crop.
The last is always a “bumper crop” for the political and civil servants. The politicians not
only had us arrested, but they also tried to have me murdered. The superintendent of police
himself threatened this. Many Christian leaders were frightened, and disassociated
themselves from me. Such treatment hurts. It makes you lose friends. They choose not to
associate with you, lest they too, get into trouble. Yet, one has to decide whether he wishes
to walk in the footsteps of his Master and serve the oppressed, or please his friends. Jesus'
mercy did not touch a blind beggar alone. How many blind people could He heal in three
years anyway? How many blind people can the church heal through its hospitals and eye
centres? We must have compassion for the individual. But we must also understand
that he is a beggar not because he is blind, but because the society in which he lives is
blind to his need. A blind man can be happy and fulfilled if society cares for him.

Karl Marx rightly understood that true compassion calls for dealing with the social context
which makes men miserable. Marx, however, defeated his own purpose by trying to build a
case for compassion on atheistic premises. If the individual man is merely a product of
random chance in an impersonal universe, then there is no meaning in caring for him,
especially when he is too weak and powerless to be of any use to us. But if man is a
created being, then he is special to his Creator. If he is created as the image-bearer of the
Creator Himself, he is even more special. If each individual is to relate to the Creator in an
intimate personal relationship and to carry out His will for Him in this world, then he is
very special indeed. That is how Jesus saw this blind beggar. `He is blind so that God's
power might be seen at work in him' (John 9:3 GN).

Because an `unknown' blind beggar is special to God we must have compassion for him
individually. This compassion must be visible in specific acts of mercy, but our
compassion for him must go deep enough to create a society which can see that a beggar is
a special person of God; he ought not to be allowed to destroy his self-respect by begging.
He should not have to live a hand-to-mouth insecure existence, until one day he falls sick,
becomes too weak to beg and rots by the roadside to be eaten by beasts, birds and worms.

If our society cannot see that a blind beggar is a special person, then we are blind to truth.
And if we do not acknowledge our blindness, then we are hypocritical, self- righteous and
sinful. We should condemn the blindness of our society, and work to build a more humane
and compassionate community within it.

Service: An Alternative Power for Social Change

It is not enough to stir a society or to judge a blind Establishment. If the leadership does
not repent, if it does not decide to fulfil its responsibility, then it becomes our task to seek
to provide an alternative. Servanthood is the Biblical motive and means of acquiring
morally legitimate power to lead. However, if it becomes known that the purpose of our
service is to change the status quo, to change the leadership, then we are in trouble. The
final decision to kill Jesus was made by the Jewish authorities after He raised Lazarus from
the dead (John 11), and when He began to be seen popularly as a shepherd, Messiah and
king.

Jesus loved Lazarus and his sisters Mary and Martha. These sisters sent word to Him that
Lazarus, His beloved friend, was sick. Jesus could have healed him by a word from
wherever He was and saved the sisters from much agony. But no; His healing ministry had
purposes other than mere healing. He waited till Lazarus died. He waited till the Jews in
Jerusalem heard of his death and had assembled in his village, Bethany, to comfort his
sisters. Then, in front of a crowd, Jesus displayed His love for the dead man and his sisters.
Jesus displayed His sorrow social force that stood for the smallest of men in contrast to the
Establishment which protected the interests of the powerful exploiters such as the traders
in the temple whom Jesus called robbers (Mark 11:15-18). Jesus called His followers to
serve 'the least important ones', the hungry, the naked, the sick, the homeless, the prisoners
(Matt.25: 31-46).

Third, this alternative power was a courageous force. It required a determination to stand
for the protection of the harassed and helpless sheep to the point of the laying down of
one's own life (John 10:1-12). This was a contrast to the Jewish Establishment, which was
concerned primarily for its own safety and well-being, and the in face of the Roman threat
was prepared to sacrifice the interest of the common man (John 11:45-8).

Jesus intentionally built up His following, His Church, as a power structure to withstand
the mighty forces of destruction and death. He said to Peter, '...you are Peter and on this
rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it' (Matt.16:18). The
destructive forces of death will fight against Christ's new society, but will not prevail
against it. The Church was meant to stand against the forces of oppression and death
because it was asked to 'feed my lambs' and 'take care of my sheep.' In an unjust,
oppressive society when a group stands up for the smallest of lambs, it automatically
stands and anger at sickness and death which caused such anguish to His beloved.
Jesus displayed His unique relationship with God, His Father, and He displayed His
authority and power to give life to the dead.

This display of love, sorrow, anger and power were the means of exhibiting who He really
was, so that people could make an intelligent choice for or against Him. Jesus' prayer in
John 11:41-2 makes it abundantly clear that even though Jesus could have healed Lazarus
and raised him from the dead without exhibiting who He was, He felt it necessary at that
point to enable the world to see His heart, His being and His power.

The miracle had the intended effect: many people believed in Jesus. Their choice of Jesus
was an automatic rejection of the Establishment (John 12:9-11). Jesus had provided an
alternative to Israel and people began to accept it. The Establishment was aligned to the
exploitative Roman regime (John 19:15). It existed because it not only allowed but also
enabled Rome to continue its exploitation of the people. The chief priests knew that if
Jesus was allowed to extend His influence over the people, a new centre of mass power
would be created which would be in the interest of the common man. Rome obviously
could not tolerate a leadership, which defended the interest of the people. Therefore, it was
inevitable that `The Roman authorities will take action and destroy our Temple and our
nation' (John 11:48). Therefore, if the nation was to be 'saved' the shepherd had to be
eliminated (John 11:49-50). „Slavery is better than destruction‟ was their rationale.

The healing ministry of Jesus not merely healed individuals but to it also built up a mass
following, just as His preaching not only educated but also drew out a whole-hearted
dedication to follow Him. The separation of evangelism and church planting has created a
mentality among Christians all over the world which leads to preaching and serving, but
not to building up a faith-filled following. Because of this mentality many people cannot
even see in the Gospel the obvious fact that Jesus was building up a disciple-based
movement through His teaching, preaching and healing.

However, a fresh look at the Gospels will convince the reader that Jesus carefully
built a large following which was not just another religious sect, but was an
alternative centre of power in Israel. It was a threat to the status quo not only naturally.
but also intentionally, because it was the very antithesis of all that the Establishment
represented.

First, this alternative centre of power was a moral force in contrast to the immoral
Jewish Establishment. Jesus had not only healed men but also called them to 'stop
sinning' (John 5:14). He called His disciples to righteousness which 'surpasses that of the
Pharisees and the teachers of the Law' (Matt. 5:20).

Second, it was a social force that stood up for the smallest of men in contrast to the
Establishment which protected the interests of the powerful exploiters such as the traders
in the temple whom Jesus called robbers (Mark 11:15-18). Jesus called His followers to
serve „the least important ones‟, the hungry, the naked, the sick, the homeless, the
prisoners (Matt. 25:31-46).

Third, this alternative power was a courageous force. It required a determination to

stand for the protection of the harassed and helpless sheep to the point of the laying down
of one‟s own life (John 10:1-12). This was a contrast to the Jewish Establishment which
was concerned primarily for it‟s own safety and well-being, and in the face of the Roman
threat was prepared to sacrifice the interests of the common man (John 11:45-8).

Jesus intentionally built up His following, His Church, as a power structure to

withstand the mighty forces of destruction and death. He said to Peter, „…you are Peter
and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it‟ (Matt.
16:18). The destructive forces of death will fight against Christ‟s new society, but will
not prevail against it. The Church was meant to stand against the forces of oppression and
death because it was asked to „feed my lambs‟ and „take care of my sheep‟. In an unjust,
oppressive society when a group stands up for the smallest of lambs, it automatically
stands up against the mighty vested interests which grow fat on their flesh (see Isaiah
61:1-2).

Jesus and His new community were naturally and intentionally a threat to the
Establishment then. When Jesus set His face to go to Jerusalem and precipitate a
confrontation, the Establishment had to choose between its own survival and the status
quo on the one hand, and a titanic socio-political change and transfer of power to
another group on the other hand.

Even though it is true that, in many cases, the 'Sunday-school Jesus' confines Himself only
to the changing of men's hearts, the Jesus of the Gospels aimed at changing both human
and human society. He prepared shepherds to replace wolves from the leadership of Israel.
He made His intentions explicit. For example, in the parable of the labourers in the
vineyard (Mnatt. 21:31-46), He concluded by telling the chief priests, `And so I tell you
that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will
produce the proper fruits' (v.43).

Here was an explicit statement of a radical social transformation, of change of political

power. The Jews understood Jesus and tried to arrest Him on the spot, but they were afraid
of the crowds, who considered Jesus to be a prophet' (v.46). Jesus announced His intention
of a social change to the Establishment itself after He had carefully built up His mass
support, even though the wise men had announced His Kingship at His birth and John the
Baptist had announced some of the changes that Jesus was to bring about before Jesus
began His work. Jesus asserted His royal authority over Zion, through the dramatic events
of His triumphal entry into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday, only after the raising of Lazarus,
which had created an excitement in the masses.

Power was not an accidental by-product of service. It never is. The Church has no real
competitor in the field of service in India today. But it continues to be powerless. This is
because our service is very different from Christ's. He consciously cultivated a mass
following. Jesus was a man of the masses and in part He built up His massive following by
His service. Look at His strategy following the raising of Lazarus in John's Gospel (John
11:45-12:33).

First, He brought a dead man back to life. He allowed the story of this fantastic miracle to
spread to the point when it started ringing alarm-bells in the ears of the Establishment
(John 11:45-53). Then, He withdrew to a desert town, Ephraim (v.54). It was near the time
of the Passover festival, when many Jews poured into Jerusalem. They naturally gossiped
about Jesus (11:55-7); after He had become the hot topic of debate, He returned to
Bethany, to Lazarus' home, just two kilometres from Jerusalem; the word spread in
Jerusalem and crowds flocked, to see not only Him but also Lazarus (John 12:1-11). Then,
when a large enough crowd had gathered about Jesus, He asked for a colt and allowed His
disciples to organise a procession. They marched into Jerusalem proclaiming Him to be
the King of Israel. The whole city was stirred up, until the authorities sat up and said to
each other, 'You see, we are not succeeding at all! Look, the whole world is following him'
(John 12:19).

The result of this strategy was that the Jews decided to kill both Jesus and Lazarus (John
12:9-11) Christ knew that this would be the consequence of what He was doing, but He
had no choice. The Establishment had refused to repent; it had refused to believe the truth
and had decided to continue in its evil ways. Either Jesus had to give up His call for
repentance and change or He had to precipitate a confrontation to give a last opportunity to
the Establishment either to repent or to kill Him. Jesus was prepared to pay the price of
such a confrontation.

Jesus did not heal the blind man or raise Lazarus from the dead merely to make them live
comfortably. He was paying a price for the world and His followers had to pay a price, too.
Our service to the poor fails to produce a following often because it is funded from
abroad and therefore it does not ask the beneficiaries to pay a price. When Jesus sent
the twelve apostles to preach and heal in Israel, He prohibited them from taking money
with them (Matt.10:5-10). The beneficiaries of their healing ministry had to pay for
their upkeep and thus become participants if not the owners of His movement. Jesus
accepted His death, the price which He paid as a criminal, as His glory, and He carefully
chose the time and manner of His own death so that His cause could receive the maximum
benefit from His crucifixion.

The purpose of cultivating a mass following was not to gain a selfish crown. Satan had
offered the kingship to Jesus at the very beginning of His ministry (Matt.4:8-10). But
He refused to have the kingdom for Himself. He wanted the kingdom for the poor (Matt.
5:3; Luke 6:20), the sorrowful (Matt. 5:4), the meek (Matt. 5:5). The poorer masses saw
Him as their Messiah and began to follow Him, which naturally threatened the existing
leadership. The Jewish authorities had perceived: 'The whole world is following Him;
therefore He has to be eliminated'. The crucifixion, not international recognition, was His
real glory, laying down His life for the poor of His nation, the harassed and the helpless
lost sheep.

The totality of Jesus' ministry gave Him a mass following which in turn gave Him
power. This seriously threatened the Establishment and meant death, which was the final
proof of whether Jesus was really serving others or only Himself. An all-out love for God
and for one's neighbours has to be tested. Jesus was prepared to be tested by fire.

When people are so committed to changing the unjust social structures in favour of the
enslaved, exploited and oppressed that they will lay down their lives for the cause, they are
bound to create ripples in history that never cease.

Neither the Jews nor the Romans killed Jesus in order to make Him a sin-offering. The
historical cause of His death was that He was a serious troublemaker as far as the
Establishment was concerned. Their charge against Him was that He had claimed to be the
legitimate king of the Jews, which meant that their rule was illegitimate.
Yet this is not to say that the theological meaning of the cross, that Jesus died for man's
sin, is false, less true or historically untrue.

As Jesus hung upon the cross of Calvary, it was literally the sin of the world that was
hanging there at that moment of history. The people who physically saw that crucifixion,
whether or not they were Christ's followers, saw that it was not the justice but the injustice
of man that was being carried out that day. In the arrest, trial and crucifixion of Christ,
man's sin was more than visible: man's disobedience to God, man's rejection of truth, man's
cruelty, his lies, his hate, his greed, his vested interest, his oppression, his exploitation, his
abuse of power, his deliberate choice of evil were all there on the cross for everyone to see,
hear and feel. That is why the Biblical statement that Jesus became the sin of the world, is
not some theological mumbo-jumbo, but a statement of historical fact. It was not Jesus
who was judged on that cross, but the sin of mankind that was judged and condemned.

The eyewitnesses, such as the dying thief, could see that man's evil was hanging on Jesus‟
cross. That is why (*The act of proclaiming forgiveness for sin through Jesus‘ death on the
cross is described in legal terms as ―witnessing‖ because it is first a historical statement
and only then a theological statement.) the Bible declares that God has now decreed, that
since Jesus loved sinners so much and became the sin of the world Himself on the cross,
man can find forgiveness for his sin through faith in the death of Christ, as the final and
complete sin-offering. But conversely, if a man does not personally accept the death of
Christ as a means to his salvation from sin, then he cannot be saved; he will himself have
to take the full consequences of sin before a perfectly Holy God. Many people find it hard
to accept that the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross is the only means of finding forgiveness
for one's sin. But who else ever became sin for the world? In the whole of human history
Jesus is the only one who took man's sin upon Himself.

The Jews did not crucify Jesus to make Him a sin offering for the world, but since He did
become sin on the cross by His own choice, God declared that 'there is no other name
under heaven given to men by which we must be saved' (Acts 4:12). Indeed, the New
Testament focuses on the theological meaning of the cross, i.e., Jesus as the Saviour from
sin, far more than it focuses on the immediate meaning of the cross, i.e., Jesus the
troublemaker. One of the reasons for this is that the meaning of the cross was obvious to
the contemporaries of the New Testament writers, whereas the theological meaning needed
exposition, defence and practical application. We can ignore the theological meaning of the
cross only at eternal cost to ourselves.

However, the contemporary assumption that the historical meaning of the cross in its own
immediate context is irrelevant is equally mistaken. Jesus not only carried His cross, but
He asked His disciples to carry their own crosses, too. One cannot be a disciple of Christ
unless one takes up one's cross and follows Him (Luke 9:23).

What does it mean to carry one's cross?

The capital punishment of crucifixion was the weapon used to perpetuate Rome's reign of
terror. Those condemned to die had to carry their own crosses to a public place where they
were crucified. Jesus asked His disciples to fight Rome with its own weapon, instead of
trying to fight it with the sword.

Mahatma Gandhi well understood and imitated Christ on this point. Some Indians wanted
to fight British colonialism with guns and bombs. But Gandhi asked his followers to fill
the British jails and accept the British stick-blows and bullets. When the British threw
Gandhi in jail, it was not Gandhi who was judged and condemned but the British
themselves. When they beat and killed the peaceful protesters, they in fact destroyed their
own kingdom. That was what Jesus had invited His disciples to do. To 'take up your cross'
means to become a rebel, to fight a corrupt establishment with moral weapons, to be a
troublemaker and take the consequences of that.

Historically, the cross was the strategy of Christ and His followers in their battle against
not only the heavenly, but also the secular powers, principalities and rulers of His dark age.
During the day the Jews could not arrest Jesus in Jerusalem in that week of festivity,
because the crowds revered Him as a prophet. They could not arrest Him at night secretly,
because He didn't spend the nights in Jerusalem. There was no way they could have
arrested Him in the Garden of Gethsemane, even with the help of Judas, because the
darkness was to His advantage. A group of soldiers with torches, searching for a man in
the woods, face an impossible task. He can slip out in any direction. In our districts of
Madhya Pradesh, bandits have dodged whole battalions of police for as many as thirty
years in the jungles. Jesus said that no one takes His life from Him (they couldn't), but that
He lays it down Himself. Under His Father's guidance, He chose to die, at a time which
best suited His purposes or strategy.

On His cross, the Scripture says, He made a mockery of powers and authorities by
disarming them, i.e., by making their weapon - the cross - redundant (Col. 2:15).

Today, in many countries of the world where evil, corruption and tyranny reign, heaping
untold miseries on the weak and the poor, Christ calls His disciples to a practical
compassion for the sheep. He calls His followers to take up their cross and follow Him in
the path of service, protest and confrontation.

A man whose perception of Christianity is conditioned by the contemporary image of

the Church is very likely to dismiss this interpretation of the historical meaning of the
cross as a heresy. But Gamaliel, a respected Jewish rabbi, who watched Jesus and His
cross-bearing community closely and sympathetically, saw them as well intentioned
political rebels. He naturally classed the apostles with Theudas and Judas the
Galilean who 'also' led revolts against Rome. The entire Jewish Sanhedrin both
critics and sympathisers of the apostles-agreed with Gamaliel's perception of the
Church as a band of rebels (Acts 5:33-40).

Through His service Jesus deliberately became a champion of the masses. But this does
not mean that He went after cheap popularity with the masses. He demanded costly
discipleship. Only by creating disciples who are prepared to care for the sheep at the cost
of their own lives, can we hope to stand up against the gates of Hades. The Lord Jesus
created a mass following, a power base, to disrupt the structures that had kept the
blind man a beggar.

Our service today lacks power because it is often marked by self-love, or it is produced by
compassion which does not understand the social roots of human misery and gives no
answer to them. When we choose to live for others in such a way that we are willing to lay
down our lives for them, we shall produce fruit for God, because we shall have power.
This will bring honour to God and to us, though through the cross.

A Story from Indian Church History

Indian society has experienced enormous change and improvement during the last two
hundred years. Many people forget that this process of social change was initiated by the
Gospel because it was understood that Christian compassion called for a crusade
against those social institutions and practices which oppress and dehumanise man.

The battles against sati (burning of widows), untouchability, child marriage, female
infanticide, bonded agricultural labour, drunkenness and opium addiction, were
often initiated and led by missionaries. Hindu reformers took up the battle following the
missionaries. However, we must admit with shame that when reform began to touch the
evil of colonialism itself, the Church backed out, leaving the leadership in non-Christian
hands. Nevertheless, there is much we can learn from the nature of the early Protestant
movement in India. One good example was a crusade against the exploitation of forced
labourers by the indigo planters in Bengal.

Indigo is a plant from which dye is made. After indigo plantations ceased to be very
profitable in the West Indies and America, many European planters came to Bengal and
joined the Indian landlords in the indigo plantations. They leased or bought large estates
which were rented to Indian peasants for cultivation. Peasants were given initial loans
which landed them and their children in virtual slavery. According to the terms of the loan
and cultivation rights, they had to grow a fixed quantity of indigo for their landlords'
factories, whether or not they could grow any food for themselves.

For decades, when the cost of other agricultural produce doubled or tripled, the price of
indigo was kept fixed. The result was that production cost was often higher than the selling
price. This kept the peasants on the point of perpetual starvation. If anyone protested he
was kidnapped, locked in a factory and beaten up by the muscle-men of the landlords. The
police and judiciary were bought off by bribes. Any honest officers and magistrates could
do little because no peasant dared to witness against a landlord or his muscle-men. It was a
reign of terror.

These cruel European landlords were a great help to the evangelists whenever they went on
their preaching excursions among the peasants. But when the evangelists heard the
peasant's tales of woe, they realised that these men with empty bellies could not possibly
pay attention to the Gospel. Even if they could hear it, they could not accept it, because the
evangelists were patronised by their oppressors, the landlords.
The Rev. F. Schurr, a CMS missionary, was among those who were deeply grieved by the
cruelties of the indigo planters. Like Moses long ago, he chose to reject the patronage of
the planters in order to participate in the sufferings of the peasants. He exposed the
cruelties of the indigo plantation system by reading a paper 'On the influence of the system
of indigo planting in the spread of Christianity' in September 1855 at a conference of
Bengal missionaries held in Calcutta.

This sparked off a controversy. Some “Protestants” initially opposed the idea of getting
involved, but gradually as the facts became known most joined the battle. The Hindu
intelligentsia and the secular press played helpful roles. A powerful appeal was made to the
Government to appoint a commission of inquiry and change the system of forced labour.
The planters predictably fought back, blaming the missionaries for leaving religious
matters and meddling in political and secular affairs and creating class conflict. The
Government sided with the planters and turned down the appeal for a commission of
inquiry without even giving a reason.

The missionaries were infuriated and moved the matter in the British parliament and
aroused public opinion in Britain and in Bengal. Among the means used were art and
drama. Michael Madhusudan Dutt, the Hindu convert whose poetry gave birth to Bengali
nationalism, translated into English a Bengali drama, Mirror of Indigo which was a satire
on the indigo system portraying the effects of the system on a labourer‟s family.

For tactical reasons (it would seem) the English version of the drama was published in the
name of Rev. James Long, another CMS missionary. A criminal case for libel was started
against him for this and he was finally imprisoned for serving the oppressed.

Here was a service that stirred up a society, exposed and condemned the cruelty of a blind
Establishment and brought the cross, power and honour to Christian servants. An
Australian historian, G.A. Oddie, wrote thus about the results of Long's imprisonment:

“Long's apparent willingness to suffer for the sake of others and in the cause of peace
with justice for the ryots [peasants] of lower Bengal, his lack of bitterness and self-
regard and his cheerful acceptance of what he believed was an inescapable duty made a
profound impression. Indeed, his attitude and stand on the indigo issue probably did
more to commend his faith than any amount of preaching could ever have
accomplished and at least for the time being affected Hindu and other non-Christian
perceptions of Christianity. It reinforced the impression created by the missionaries'
earlier participation in the indigo controversy that they totally rejected the racial
arrogance of fellow Europeans and were not 'partakers of other men's sins'. `The Rev.
J.Long', wrote the editor of the Indian Mirror, „has acted manfully and precisely in the
manner a true Christian missionary should have done when placed under the same
circumstances.‟ Dr Kay of the S.P.G., who visited Long in prison, remarked on the
tone of vernacular newspapers and quoted one as saying that, if this be Christianity,
then we wish Christianity would spread all over the country. Duff, Wylie , Stuart and
others believed that Long's imprisonment was creating a very favourable impression
for Christian missions and catechists informed Long that as a result of his
imprisonment 'people have listened...more willingly to their preaching'.”* (Footnote:
See What Liberates A Woman: The Story of Pandita Ramabai - A Builder of Modern
India by MacNicol and Mangalwadi, published by Nivedit Good Books Distributors
Private Limited.)

It will no doubt be argued that Long lived in British India and thus was able to speak
boldly against 'his own system'. Modern missionaries in India are prohibited from such
interference. It may be true that as guests they do not have the right to interfere with our
socio-economic system. But the problem comes when the missionaries (and even Indian
church leaders) prohibit the Indian Christians from being true to their “Protestant” tradition
which has to mean involvement in such daring acts of compassion. The missionaries keep
the Indian Church away from the mainstream of national life, and prevent us from
cultivating a feeling that this is 'our system', and we have not only the right but a
responsibility to love it and make it just.

By the end of the nineteenth century, Jesus had become the central issue in India,
primarily because the Church not only evangelised but also led the action for social
reform and upliftment of the down-trodden. J.N. Farquhar, in his classic study,
Modern Religious Movements in India (published at the beginning of this century)
shows that Christ was then the central factor in the ferment in Indian consciousness.
All the movements were either responding to Him or reacting to Him.

However, when Indian leadership began to feel that the greatest social evil in India
was colonialism, the Church generally withdrew from the arena. Therefore the
initiative and leadership of the reform movement passed out of Christian hands. In
the 1920s and '30s Jesus became a side issue in India. Missionary statesmen such as E.
Stanley Jones realised what great damage a short-sighted Christian leadership was
doing to the cause of Christ by not participating in the national struggle for
independence. Stanley Jones, therefore, vigorously supported the independence
movement. The British Government retaliated by banning his entry into India for
five years.

It was most unfortunate that at that time the Indian Church neither stood up for
independence, nor even for Dr Stanley Jones who had served the Church as few others had.
The result of this non-involvement was that by the 1940s and '50s Jesus became a
non-issue in India, Christianity appeared to be a tool of Western imperialism, and
Christians began to be perceived as those whose loyalties did not lie with India. This
popular misconception continues to make evangelism ineffective. If Jesus continues to
remain a non-issue much longer, we shall certainty wipe out the tremendous legacy of the
two hundred years of missionary service in India.

Take the issue of freedom for women to develop as full human beings. A century ago,
when Christians first started admitting girls to school in our district, the Hindu pundits
said, 'You might as well educate the cows.' Pandita Ramabai, a brilliant high-caste woman,
who founded the Ramabai Mukti Mission (Mukti means liberation), was converted to
Christ because she saw Jesus as the true liberator of women (e.g., His dealing with the
Samaritan woman in John 4).

Today, Jesus is no longer seen as a liberator of women, even though the evils of female
foeticide, female infanticide, child marriage, dowry, bride-burning, forced prostitution,
'flesh trade' (or selling of women as slaves), continue unabated. (As the Christian influence
declines in India, even the most horrifying ritual of sati has been revived.) It was banned
one hundred and fifty-eight years ago primarily due to the efforts of the first British
missionary in India, William Carey, who was supported by the British reformer William
Wilberforce and the Indian reformer Raja Ram Mohan Roy. (*Footnote: See Carey, Christ
and Cultural Transformation by Vishal and Ruth Mangalwadi, published by Paternoster
Press, England.)

In such a situation where evils continue to be institutionalised, Jesus could be brought back
into the centre of the debate by compassionate Christian interaction with the mainstream.
Why are we uninvolved? For some it is a matter of lack of compassion - religious service
has become a means of self-aggrandisement. For others, it is a theological problem. The
action for social reform, they feel, would take them away from their calling to be
witnesses. We shall take up this latter problem in the next chapter. We can conclude this
chapter by reminding ourselves that Christ‟s conflict with the religious system of His day
was focused substantially on this point: their religiosity lacked mercy and compassion.
Jesus said, “Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy” (Matt. 5:7). Jesus
brushed aside the self-righteousness of the Pharisees with an exhortation from the Old
Testament, “But go and learn what this means: (God says) „I desire mercy, not sacrifice‟”
(Matt. 9:13). He explained to them that their spiritual blindness was rooted in their lack of
understanding that unlike the pagan gods, their God demanded from them not animal
sacrifices for Himself, but compassion for their fellow-beings who suffered (Matt. 12:3-7).
Jesus equates lack of compassion with wickedness (Matt. 8:33). The most sobering feature
to remember is that Jesus said that at the Last Judgment, our relationship with God will be
judged on the grounds of our life of compassion or lack of it (Matt. 25:31-46).
2

EVANGELISM AND SOCIAL REFORM:

ALL THINGS NEW

A society cannot be reformed unless it is first informed of what is wrong with it, what
is right and how to get it put right. Some societies permit action for reform. They are
called 'open' societies. They grant freedom to the citizens to oppose the evils of the rulers.
These societies have inbuilt self-correcting mechanisms. But this is a relatively recent
phenomenon in world history. Most societies even today are 'closed'. Insiders can hardly
speak against the evils in their society, let alone do anything about them. Attacking
social evils in these societies is virtually impossible; even preaching takes enormous
courage. When centres of power have been taken over by corrupt vested interests, a reform
movement has to awaken and organise the common man. In other words, to bring about
a fundamental change in the evil institutions of a society, one needs to build up a mass
movement. Preaching is the prerequisite for building up a movement, and this can be
undertaken by an individual.

In a closed society, preaching is often the only tool available to the reformers. For
example, Jeremiah was given the task of reform. God said to him, 'See, today I
appoint you over nations and kingdoms to uproot and tear down, to destroy and
overthrow, to build and to plant' (1:10). What was Jeremiah's tool for reform?
Nothing but preaching. God said to him, `You must go to everyone I send you to and say
whatever I command you. Do not be afraid of them...'(7-8).

The fact that a person is only preaching does not necessarily mean that he is not a reformer.
John the Baptist was a lone voice preaching a new kingdom. But he triggered off a
movement. By the time of Paul, the fulltime preachers of the Kingdom were numbered in
scores. Ultimately, it is ideas, not armies, that rule the world.

Social reform is usually a people's movement which seeks to remove the evils of society
and transform its unjust oppressive values, ideals, practices and institutions into being just,
humane and conducive to human fulfilments. A movement for social reform is based on:
(a) A critical awareness in a society that their values and institutions are
fundamentally wrong.
(b) A hope that a change is possible.
(c) A faith that a better alternative is in fact available.
(d) A leadership that is able to organise and mobilise the masses against the evil
status quo.

Piecemeal social reform is possible. A group of people may see one particular social evil,
protest against it and set right the injustice. But from a Christian point of view evil is
cosmic, it has a supernatural dimension. The conflict of good and evil is a conflict of two
kingdoms - the kingdom of Satan versus the Kingdom of God. Therefore an evangelist
aims at holistic, not piecemeal, reform. As St. Paul put it, evangelism or Good News
implies 'the new has come' (2 Cor. 5.17). The evangelist seeks to bring the kingdom of
Satan under the righteous reign of God, even though he recognises that until Christ returns
all change is temporary, that the forces of evil will fight back and seek to corrupt the
hearts and institutions of man.

Kingdom of Satan

Some years ago a non-Christian young man was sent to our community in ACRA. Though
he was an intelligent and pleasant person, he had some deep personality disorder which we
could not understand. He had been taken to the best medical and psychiatric experts in
India, but that had been of no help. After he had been with us for several months some of
us began to suspect, for a variety of reasons, that perhaps his problem was demonic. So we
began to pray for him. One night as I was riding my motor-cycle back from the town to our
village I felt in my spirit that it was going to be a crucial night for that young man. Soon I
found myself praying out loud and singing as I rode. It was past nine o'clock on that wintry
night when he met me at the gate and announced that he was leaving us. I requested him to
wait till the morning and proceeded to call the community together for prayer. We prayed
for him the whole night, but apparently to no effect. He disappeared the next day. We had a
great sense of failure and I felt that we had simply made fools of ourselves.* {insertion
from text: Months later we discovered that the personality disorder did in fact begin after
the boys‘ uncle has some sorcerers cast spells on him to enable the uncle to take over his
father‘s restaurant business.}

But there were three young people in our community who did not give up. They began to
pray that God would bring a simple case of demon possession before us and initiate us into
the realm of the supernatural reality. These three decided to fast and pray over a weekend.
On the first night of their prayers, one 10-Year-old Hindu girl in our community had an
attack of fits, which she had never had before. Because she was a girl, her parents decided
not to disturb any of us at night, so they didn't tell us. But by the morning she was better,
so no one took much notice of the episode.

Two days later she had another severe attack of fits. As I was walking back to my home
after morning prayers, I saw her lying on her string cot. She was writhing with pain. She
had high fever and in a rhythmic fashion she was lifting her head and banging it back on
the cot in much agony.

One of the three young people who had been praying suggested to me that we ought to
pray for her as she had an evil spirit. The young man's mother, however, insisted that the
girl simply had an attack of fits and should be taken to a doctor. I was indecisive, hesitant
to say that my Christian friend was mistaken, yet unwilling to make a fool of myself as
before when the whole night of prayer ended in failure. I thought it best to have my
breakfast before deciding whether to take her to the hospital or to pray.

While I ate breakfast one of our Hindu friends took his bicycle, went to the village and
brought back a sorcerer. This sorcerer saw the girl and straightaway abused the demon in
filthy language, asking it to come out. To everyone's amazement the girl became normal in
an instant.

Naturally I felt humiliated. I had to admit that even though I was a Christian, my secular
education had really made me quite naturalistic. Deep down in my mind I was not really
sure that evil spirits affected human beings. My Hindu neighbours in the village
understood the supernatural nature of the universe much better than I did and were
therefore able to handle such a situation more confidently. Our community had another
prayer meeting repenting of our unbelief, praying for another opportunity to discover the
power of God.

A week later a 20-year-old man had a similar attack of fits, except that it was much worse.
By the time we reached him, he was screaming out loud that he was going to die. He
complained of a splitting headache and body ache. He, too, was lifting and banging his
head on his bed in a rhythm. We felt that it was the same evil spirit which had earlier
troubled that girl. So, we began to pray. We prayed for over an hour but nothing happened.
Gradually people began to leave the room. The boy's condition became worse. There was a
self-confessed agnostic in the community, who began to mock us as well as advise us to
take the boy to the hospital instead of playing with his life.

Finally, only two of us were left praying. Doubts began to come to my own mind. There
was nothing much left to pray about, anyway. So l had to choose again; do we take him to
the hospital or pray more? With my eyes open, looking at the agony of our friend, l made
my decision out loud. ''This time l refuse to be deceived. This is demonic and the evil spirit
must go. 'At that moment, in an instant, the fever, pain and fits all vanished. The boy got
up as if from a trance. He walked with us to the next house where many of the community
members were having coffee, and announced, `I was dying; these people prayed for me
and the Lord Jesus has healed me.'

Most Christians, I suppose, will have little difficulty believing that evil supernatural forces
exist and bring suffering upon individuals. But in today's cultural climate many may have
difficulty in believing that the evil supernatural forces also affect and seek to control the
socio-political systems under which we live. The Bible says: 'The devil led Him [Jesus] up
to a high place and showed Him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. And he said to
Him, "I will give you all their authority and splendour, for it has been given to me, and I
can give it to anyone I want to. So if you worship me, it will all be yours "'(Luke 4:5-7).

The devil was not bluffing Jesus. Jesus Himself acknowledged that Satan was the 'prince of
this world' (John 16:11). St. Paul called him 'ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who
is now at work in those who are disobedient' (Eph. 2:2).

St. John says, 'we know that ...the whole world is under the control of the evil one' (1 John
5:19).

It was Daniel in the Old Testament who was first given the insight that behind the socio-
political evils lie supernatural powers. In Daniel, chapter 2, King Nebuchadnezzar saw the
statue of precious metals that represented the four successive empires of gold
(Babylonian), silver (Medes and Persian), bronze (Greek) and iron (Roman) and finally a
mere stone (the Kingdom of God) which conquered the kingdoms of this world.

In chapter 7, as Daniel, the governor, sought to understand where history was going and
God's role in it, he was given the vision of these same four kingdoms - not as the dazzling
statue of precious metals but in their essence and spiritual nature - as beasts that devour:
the lion (Babylonian), the bear (Medes and Persians), the leopard (Greek) and the 'fourth
beast - terrifying and frightening and very powerful. It had large iron teeth; it crushed and
devoured its victims and trampled underfoot whatever was left' (Dan. 7:7). This was the
Roman Empire. In contrast to these beastly kingdoms which came out of the
Mediterranean Sea, Daniel saw the humaneness of the coming Kingdom of God as 'a son
of man, coming with the clouds' (Dan.7:13). As Daniel fasted and prayed to understand
history further, it was revealed to him that the kingdoms of this world were beastly because
there were evil, supernatural forces behind them. The angel said to Daniel:

“Since the first day that you set your mind to gain understanding and humble yourself
before your God, your words were heard, and I have come in response to them. But the
prince of the Persian kingdom resisted me twenty-one days. Then Michael, one of the chief
princes, came to help me, because I was detained there with the king of Persia ... Soon I
will return to fight against the prince of Persia, and when I go, the prince of Greece will
come. (Dan. 10:12-20).”

I understood the Biblical teaching that the socio-political evils have supernatural
dimension when I saw the Hindi film Ardh Satya (Half-Truth). It is a film about a police
inspector in Bombay who seeks to fight political/bureaucratic corruption. The film says
that courage and integrity are half-truths. When a man of great courage and integrity stands
up against social evils, he destroys not the evil but himself. The film realistically shows
that evil in our social system is far stronger than a heroic police officer, a journalist, a
social scientist, an agitator for the civil rights movement, or a trade union leader. They can
do little about evil, because they don't even understand its true nature or power. The film
says that we live in a system where evil is greater than good and it rules. That is what I
believe the New Testament implies by the teaching that Satan has taken over the control of
this world's kingdoms. Without this perspective, it is impossible to understand adequately
how political authority can degenerate to the levels of cruelty and wickedness that it so
often does.

The Creator gave this earth to mankind to manage. Therefore Satan can rule here to the
extent that we let him. For this reason, the kingdom of Satan begins in the mind. It
began when Eve doubted God and believed Satan (Gen. 3:1-6). St. Paul also teaches the
same truth in Romans 1:18-32. The kingdom of Satan begins when we turn away from
truth to believe falsehood. When the mind is darkened, our behaviour quickly becomes
immoral. Sin then begins to rule in our bodies. When most people in a society turn away
from truth, then that society confuses right with wrong and wrong with right. After
affecting our mind and behaviour, Satan then affects the social institutions which our
darkened minds build and govern. The human institutions so affected become corrupt,
wicked and oppressive. It was the authority and splendour of the oppressive political
institutions of man that Satan claimed were his kingdom.

Because of their individualistic outlook modern Christians seem to think that Satan's
objective is to lead individual souls astray. But the Book of Revelation reveals that Satan is
out to 'deceive the nations' (Rev. 20:3,8). He 'leads the whole world astray' (Rev. 12:9).

What is Satan's basic deception? Again, Revelation says that the plan of the great
dragon is to control the political power. The 'dragon [Satan] gave the beast [emperor]
his power and his throne and great authority ... Men worshipped the dragon because
he had given authority to the beast, and they also worshipped the beast' (Rev. 13:2-4).
It is the 'beast' (the human king - Rev. 17:11) who makes war against Christ and wants to
be worshipped as God.

The modern secular ideologies which deny God, end up making the State to be the
Lord and Saviour. They violate the first of the Ten Commandments, 'You will have no
other god besides me', and by making the State 'absolute' and independent of God they turn
State into an oppressive beast, causing poverty, slavery and war.

'The Truth Will Set You Free'

The rule of Satan begins in our minds, when we choose to believe his deception, and
culminates in the oppressive political institutions we build. This means that untruth is the
foundation of slavery. Proclamation of truth, therefore, is a basic means of setting
people free from oppression and exploitation. Jesus said, 'Then you will know the truth,
and the truth will set you free' (John 8:32).

Often we fail to see that the oppressive and exploitative social structures survive not
because of the strength of their institutions or their physical force, but by the spreading of
their faith. People believe the falsehood, therefore they allow themselves to be exploited.

I grew up in the city of Allahabad in the State of Uttar Pradesh in India. Millions of devout
Hindus come there from all over India to bathe in the River Ganges. They know that the
Pandas (priests) will loot them. They do their best to protect their money from the Pandas.
But they usually return home with stories about the way they were cheated. Later, they
return to the Ganges and generally get looted again. Yet they continue coming. Why?
Because they believe that the holy waters of Ganges will wash away their sins and give
salvation to the souls of their deceased relatives. Slavery is a matter of belief.

Christians at the time of Martin Luther knew that the Papacy had become an exploitative
Establishment, yet they sustained it. Why? Because they were made to believe that the
Pope, as successor of St. Peter, held the keys to salvation.

'Justification by faith' is the heart of contemporary evangelistic preaching. It was also the
heart of sixteenth - century Reformation theology. Then the doctrine of 'justification by
faith' created titanic socio-political reforms. Today it creates no ripples. Why?
Then, Martin Luther had courageously added a significant word to the Biblical teaching on
salvation by faith, which gave this truth a cutting edge in the then contemporary society. It
was the word 'alone'. 'Justification by faith alone' consciously implied that the selling of
indulgences by the Church for the salvation of the living and the dead was nothing but
economic exploitation of the masses by a corrupt religio-political Establishment. This
doctrine meant that the seven sacraments of the Church were, in the final analysis,
irrelevant for salvation. Therefore, the entire army of priests, bishops, and even the Pope,
which saw its role chiefly as sacramental, was an unnecessary economic burden.

'Salvation by faith' and 'the priesthood of all believers' were radical truths, not pious
doctrines. These truths demanded that the Pope and the entire priestly hierarchy should be
opposed because they had sucked Italy economically dry and were now threatening to rob
Germany of its wealth.

Luther's preaching of justification by faith alone stirred up the masses because it offered
spiritual as well as economic freedom. The masses are rarely moved by theological
debates. It was not the theological truth which stirred up the masses. It was the politico-
economic implications of the truth, perceived by the ordinary people to be beneficial to
them, which generated the mass movement for acceptance of the truth.

Evangelism in the sixteenth century attracted crowds because it freed nations from
the yoke of oppression; because it was 'good news to the poor' (Luke 4:18).

Paul's evangelism was exactly the same. Paul said to the Corinthians that when he visited
them. he was determined to preach nothing `except Christ and Him crucified' ( 1 Cor. 2:2).
He preached nothing except Christology and soteriology, i.e. the doctrines of Christ and
salvation through the cross. Therefore, we need to look at these two doctrines of Paul
to understand how evangelism set people free from the slavery of oppressive Jewish
and Roman systems.

Paul's Doctrine of Salvation

Paul's preaching of salvation through Christ's death on the cross is summed up in two
major themes in his epistles - grace versus law and faith versus works.

Paul preached, taught and debated that man cannot be saved by works of the law but by
faith in the grace of Christ. Paul taught that by faith in the atoning death of Christ, man can
find forgiveness from sin and reconciliation with God. This, according to Paul, meant that
there was no further need for circumcision, animal sacrifices, observance of Jewish rituals
or special days. Under the traditions the Jews had added to the Mosaic law, man had to
spend much money to earn salvation; now it was available freely. Believers no longer
needed to live under the yoke of the law. This simple but evolutionary message undercut,
in one fine stroke, the entire edifice of the exploitative Jewish structure.
Jesus said that he had come to set the captives free (Luke 4:18). Paul was showing how
that was accomplished through Christ's death.

The Jews who went to the temple in Jerusalem to offer sacrifices knew that it was a 'den of
robbers' (Matt. 21:13). Yet they came, patronised the temple and allowed themselves to be
exploited by a corrupt Establishment. Why? Because they believed that they could be
saved only through observance of the law.

Declaring that man cannot be saved by the law, but only by faith in the sacrifice of Christ,
Paul was destroying the very foundations of the exploitative Establishment. The Jews were
naturally threatened by this preaching and as we shall later see they persecuted Paul
because of the threat his message was to their whole system.

Paul was perhaps first exposed to the basics of his theology by Stephen, who taught that
the temple in Jerusalem was not the heavenly reality it was made out to be by the Jews.
Stephen said that God gave Moses the vision of the heavenly reality. Moses made a
shadow of the heavenly reality in the form of a mobile tabernacle. After Israel settled
down, David wanted to build a temple. But because David was a man of war God allowed
only his son Solomon to build it; which implies that the temple is not the ultimate sacred
institution of meeting with God. In any case, God made it plain even in the Old Testament
that He, who created the heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples built by human hands
(see Acts 6 and 7). This was a message which undercut the whole Jewish system and
predictably brought about violent retaliation.

Paul, after his conversion, preached Stephen's message with greater clarity and depth. The
message that the work of Christ had made the Jewish law redundant was best summed up
by the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews. He said, 'By calling this covenant "new", He
[God] has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear
(Heb. 8:13).

Paul was an evangelist because he preached salvation by grace. And his preaching was
seen as 'Good News' because it freed his audience from their slavery to the law. When the
Jewish converts sought to bring the law back into the Church, Paul fought them, arguing
that if that happens, grace will be futile and Christians will be back in slavery. It was Paul's
determined fight which finally made Peter declare in the Jerusalem council that the law
was a yoke on the necks of the Gentile disciples which neither the Jews nor their fathers
had been able to bear (Acts 15:10). Paul's preaching of salvation was thus a message of
social reform, of freedom from a yoke.

The late Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar, the greatest leader of the untouchables in India,
understood this same basic technique of social reform which Paul used. That is why he
preached 'conversion' as the answer to the social evil of casteism. It is unfortunately true
that Buddhism, to which he led his disciples, has turned out to be a blind alley, but it
remains true that a society can be reformed in one of three ways:
(a) One can accept the basic structure of the society, e.g. the Hindu caste system, and seek
to minimise injustices inherent in it by law, as the government of India has tried to do for
the past five decades. But Ambedkar, who wrote much of India's constitution, knew that
this approach could not transform the situation fundamentally.

(b) Therefore, a second option is to refuse to accept the basic structure of an unjust society
and seek to change the people on top who are responsible for injustices. It is almost
impossible to change the people on top merely by preaching, because they are usually
happy with the status quo. As Jesus in essence said, it's easier for a camel to go through the
eye of a needle than for a beneficiary of the kingdom of Satan to enter the Kingdom of
God. The oppressive, exploitative system is favourable to the people on top, therefore they
don't want change.

So, one is tempted to use either violent or non-violent force to overthrow the oppressors. It
is possible to overthrow the government by seizing or killing a few or a few hundred
people. But what can one do if the oppressors number literally hundreds of thousands, or if
they are too powerful to be overthrown by force?

(c)The third option then is to change the oppressed. One can refuse to accept the basic
unjust structure of society and reform the system by changing the oppressed, e.g. if the
untouchables cannot change the high-caste oppressors, their only option is to change
themselves. This change has to be at two levels. First, they have to be set free from mental
or ideological slavery. They have to cease to believe that they are born untouchables
because of the karma (actions) of their past lives and that blessings of their future lives
depend on their fulfilling the duties of their present low status. They are held in slavery by
faith in a falsehood. The truth alone can set them free from this mentality of slavery.
Second, they have to opt out of the socio-religious system, i.e. cease to be Hindus, in order
to cease to be untouchables. They have to accept a new world-view which has a high view
of man and the equality of man as basic doctrines and at the same time they have to join a
community which practises these truths.

Oppressive systems survive by propagating falsehood. Evangelism liberates by spreading

truth, i.e. by undercutting the intellectual foundations of an exploitative system and by
creating an alternative social structure which seeks to live out the truth.

Paul's Doctrine of Christ

For Paul `preaching the Good News,' and `preaching Christ' were synonymous. The
Messiah was Paul's `Good News.' Much of Paul's theology is therefore Christology. Paul's
Gospel is that `Jesus is Christ' (or Messiah). The crucified risen, exalted and soon returning
Christ is the heart of his message. Paul preached that Jesus, who was humiliated on the
cross, has now been exalted over all rulers, powers, authorities and dominions of this age
as well as of the age to come. This same Jesus, who is going to return soon to set up His
Kingdom will destroy the man of sin - the evil ruler who sets himself above God. Paul's
Christology was thus a political Gospel. Jesus was presented as King of kings and Lord of
lords. Jesus, not Caesar, was the One before whom every knee would bow and whom
every tongue would confess to be the Lord.

In his Christology, Paul was not comparing or contrasting Christ with the deities of the
then prevalent religious sects. Jesus was the alternative to the emperor and the religious
sects. Jesus was the alternative to the emperor and the religio-political ideology of the day.
The Gospel was formulated against the background of the imperial faith as the answer to
the exploitative empire. Jesus was not another or more powerful god but the only God. He,
according to Paul, was the Ruler, the final Authority, the Judge, the King - the Lord.

In a society where the 'dragon' has deceived people into worshipping the beast, Caesar
becomes the lord, and 'statism' is official creed. When the State is the ultimate, the final
reality, the absolute or the lord, it becomes the exploiter, the source of most social evils
and oppression. In such a setting, preaching of a Lord who as a Shepherd or Saviour is
above the State is exciting news. As Canon Michael Green said:

“If Jesus was going to return as the triumphant son of man in clouds of heaven...then
clearly here was the final winding up of history for which they were all waiting; here
was the break-in of the theocracy and the defeat of the impious Romans. This must
have been a factor in the immediate growth of Christianity from its cradle in
Jerusalem.”* {Insertion from text: Michael Green, Evangelism in the Early Church
Highland Books, 1984}

It is true that many preachers of Christology teach the divinity of Jesus and His
saviourhood, but fail to preach His Kingship. Most Christians therefore understand how
'Jesus saves' is good news, but fail to see how 'Jesus is Lord' is also good news. But the
wise men who came looking for the baby Jesus in Jerusalem were looking for a king
and not specifically for a saviour. Why? Because they were disillusioned with the
kings and beastly kingdoms of this world. What were the kingdoms of this world?
Brutal! Immediately after the visit of the wise men, King Herod ordered the massacre of
boys under two, in and around Bethlehem! There was nothing their parents could do to
protect the lives of their infants. In such a milieu the news that the Messiah, a new king,
is born was indeed „good news‟.

In the Roman world of the first century the message that 'the kingdom of heaven is at hand'
received such a massive response in spite of brutal opposition from the state, because it
was presented to a people who believed the prophet Daniel, who had taught that at the time
of the fourth empire (after Babylonian, Persian and Greek) the God of Heaven will raise up
His kingdom. In the first century the apostles‟ audience in the Roman Empire would have
heard the Gospel as a proclamation that the vision of Nebuchadnezzar was about to be
fulfilled: during the era of the kingdom of iron, a stone uncut with human hands will
smash and destroy the dazzling statue of precious metals (or human kingdoms) and
itself become a mighty mountain, was about to be fulfilled.

The original New Testament readers were living in the fourth empire, in the oppressive
kingdom of the beast, in the darkness of despair and death. The message that the Kingdom
of Heaven has come, and that Jesus is Christ, naturally stirred up hope and excitement - as
well as determined opposition.

Just as Paul's preaching of salvation as a free gift of God, by faith in the cross of Christ,
undercut Jewish theology and set people free from the yoke of slavery to the Jewish
Establishment, his preaching of Jesus as Lord undercut the theology of Roman
imperialism and destroyed political totalitarianism. The common man's excitement at
the realisation that Jesus was King was most visible on the first Palm Sunday, when
He entered Jerusalem on a colt with a crowd following Him and shouting 'Blessed is
the King of Israel” (John 12:12).

The Jews persecuted Paul for destroying their entire system through his preaching of the
cross (Acts 21:28). The Romans persecuted him for destroying their imperialism by his
preaching of Jesus as Lord. For example, in Thessalonica when Paul preached, `This
Jesus I am proclaiming to you is the Christ' (Acts 17:3), his opponents understood
him as 'defying Caesar's decrees, saying that there is another king, one called Jesus'
(v.7). Did they misunderstand Paul? If it was a matter of misunderstanding a spiritual king
as a political threat, then Paul and the other apostles could have easily corrected that
misunderstanding. In fact they would have avoided preaching Jesus as 'Christ' and
concentrated on preaching Him only as the Saviour. But they did not compromise their
preaching. It was natural that such preaching would result in persecution. They knew
Jesus as 'the ruler of the kings of the earth' (Rev.1:5), therefore they preached Him as
such. They in fact believed that Christians would rule over the nations of the earth
(Rev.2:26-7).

We Wrestle 'Not Against Flesh and Blood'

Some Christians may find it hard to accept this insight into Paul's Christology. Paul
himself said, they might argue, that 'our struggle is not against flesh and blood' (Eph.
6:12). How can Paul then be concerned with political reform?

Paul did say our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but added in the same verse that
we struggle 'against the rulers, against authorities, against the powers of this dark
world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms'. Paul did wrestle
with evil spirits - the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. But much of his time
was spent in struggling against the rulers and authorities of this dark world, who were
humans. It was not the evil spirits who beheaded John the Baptist, crucified Jesus,
stoned Stephen or persecuted Paul. The Church was and is pitched against the rulers and
authorities of this dark world - against those in positions of power and authority, who
prefer darkness over light. However, it is also true that there are spiritual forces of evil
over these human rulers.

I can understand why Christians living in 'open' societies fail to understand Paul's oblique
language of 'powers and principalities. 'But they ought to understand that Paul was not
living in an open society with freedom of speech guaranteed. In fact, when he wrote the
letter to the Ephesians he was under arrest with perhaps a Roman guard reading what he
wrote or listening to what he dictated. How could he say openly that he was wrestling
against the totalitarianism of Caesar?

Recently in one of our villages, a high-caste man beat an untouchable man to death. He
ordered his body to be cremated that night, before the police could come or a post-mortem
could be done. The untouchables were terrorised. As they have to live in that village they
could not oppose the wicked village chief openly. They have only whispered against the
'rulers of this dark world', in a (oblique) language very similar to Paul's.

Evangelism and Political Freedom

The evangelists did not conceive of political freedom in negative terms of the
overthrow of the Jewish and Roman Establishments. They understood and preached
political freedom primarily in terms of submission of human kings to the rule of God.
This is significant because history has not been able to throw up a better
understanding of political freedom than this.

There are many nations even today whose understanding of political freedom is no more
than skin-deep. In not a metaphorical sense, but literally. For an average Indian, for
example, political freedom is when the white colonial rulers leave and brown, black or
yellow natives take over the rule. Most often this colour-of-skin definition of political
freedom means worse oppression and tyranny. One does not need to prove the emptiness
of this definition. In almost any nation that has attained 'political freedom' since the Second
World War, the new rulers are happy with their freedom, but the ruled are usually more
oppressed and exploited than before. Colour-of-skin definition of political freedom
generally means freedom for the new governors, not necessarily the governed.

Only where the freedom is understood as the rule of law is there some freedom for the
governed. A people are free only to the degree to which the powers of their
government are limited by law. The final test of political freedom is this: Are the rulers
under the law or above the law? If any of the human rulers are above the law, then that is
rule of rulers, not the rule of law. Potentially that is a dictatorship, not a free country.
Freedom means the „Rule of law‟ not human rulers (see James 1:25, 2:12, 4:12 etc.). This
raises the fundamental question: What is the source of law - human or divine? If the law
is merely human, then those who have the power to make the law have the power to
change it, too, and thus they are above the law. Genuine freedom is impossible in societies
which have only human law.

Only if law comes from beyond man, can it be binding on all men. Only before a
transcendent law can there be a genuine equality of all men. Kings and prisoners alike can
be equal before the law if the law itself is above the king. Transcendent law presupposes a
transcendent law-giver. If there is no just ruler above the ruler of the earth, if He has not
given His law to men, then political freedom or rule of law is a sheer illusion, a mirage that
is impossible to attain. Man is condemned for ever to live under the rule of 'might is right'
whether the might be of a few or of the majority. The concept of the rule of law becomes a
superstition without faith in a just ruler above the human rulers. The European
Enlightenment of the eighteenth century tried to spread this superstition through its
concept of “Natural Law”. *(Footnote: No ruler or dictator in any Communist, Fascist,
Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim or Animist culture has been able to see this natural law, because
nature has no moral law regulating it. The moral law appeared “natural” to the
Enlightenment thinkers, such as John Locke, only because they inherited it from their
Christian heritage.)

Proclaiming Jesus as 'The ruler of the kings of the earth' was, and is, the only genuine
way of establishing politically free societies. In this sense evangelism does not
overthrow the existing political kingdoms. But by bringing kings under a
transcendental law it curtails the arbitrary freedom of the kings and thereby
increases the political freedom of the ruled.

Political freedom is determined not primarily by whether or not the king himself is
Christian, but by whether or not he is under the law of God. Political freedom will
increase in proportion to the submission of the rulers to the transcendent law in their public
lives.

Was Paul fighting a corrupt political establishment? No, if fighting is understood

militarily, but Yes, if it is understood evangelistically. He was witnessing
uncompromisingly that Jesus, not Caesar, is Lord. Christ had chosen Paul, precisely for
such political evangelism. God said to Ananias, 'This man is my chosen instrument to carry
my name before the Gentiles and their kings...'(Acts 9:15). For Paul socio-political reform
was an integral part of evangelism, because it brought the kings of this world under the
rule of Christ as it had been predicted in the Messianic Psalm 2 (the second most
frequently quoted Psalm in the New Testament). Bringing totalitarian human rulers under
the authority of a transcendent law, is the highest definition of political freedom that
history has seen.

The New Testament teaching regarding the Second Coming of Christ and the Final
Judgment of man reinforces the perspective outlined above. The doctrine of the Final
Judgment of man affirms the great significance and responsibility of each individual. What
each individual does with his or her life is important to God. But this doctrine also
establishes the equality of every man, whether high or low, before the law of God. Paul
says to the slave-owners that they should treat their slaves in the light of the fact that both
they and the slaves have a common master `in heaven, and there is no favouritism with
him' (Eph. 6:9).

The same applies to the human rulers and the ruled, judges and accused prisoners. There is
an ultimate equality of all men before the law of God. That is a radical Christian basis for
political freedom now on this earth. When an evangelist tells the kings of this earth that
they, too, have a king and judge over them, before whom they are as much accountable as
any other man, the evangelist curtails the totalitarian powers of the human rulers and
demands that they be just. That result is what political reform or freedom should ultimately
means.
From this perspective, doctrines of the Second Coming and the Final Judgment do not give
us the right to assume that the world will go from bad to worse, making reform impossible.
On the contrary, these doctrines demand that our evangelism should result in curtailing the
oppressive totalitarian powers of the human rulers.* (Footnote: For a detailed discussion of
this see the chapter entitled “Christian Hope and Social Reform”.) The kings, presidents
and prime ministers of the earth should be brought under the rule of Christ. That is
evangelism, and that is also political freedom - curtailing and limiting the power of the
State over the individual, demanding that the laws of the State be just in the light of the
justice and righteousness of God.

Evangelism frees the powerless individual by putting them in a direct relationship with
their Father - the Almighty God. Jesus gave authority to His disciples to go into all the
world and to make disciples, because, He said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has
been given to me.” When the masses are in touch with the King of Kings, when they are
assured of eternal life, they cease to fear their petty rulers whose power does not extend
beyond killing individuals. The evangelized masses limit the power of government by
making Christ the Ruler of the kings of the earth.

We shall return to the subject of evangelism and social reform in the second half of the
next chapter. But before I am misunderstood as over-emphasizing the social dimension of
evangelism at the expense of its appeal to individuals to repent and believe, let us consider
the relationship of sin to social evils and salvation to social reform.
3

SIN, SALVATION AND SOCIAL REFORM:

A NEW MAN IN CHRIST

The previous chapter sought to highlight some of the social implications of evangelism.
That, however, must not undermine the fact that in the New Testament the predominant
focus of the Good News is on an individual's salvation from sin. Though in some societies
today, selfish individualism is denying people the personal fulfilment which comes from
deep interpersonal relationships, one basic evil of the twentieth century has been to
sacrifice the individual for all sorts of supposedly 'social' goods. The 'collectivisation'
programmes of the Communist regimes that suppress individuality are too blatant an
instance of this evil to need mentioning. But the Communists are not the only guilty ones.
The killing of unborn or new-born babies for controlling the population of a nation or the
'happiness' of a nuclear family; the burning alive of a widow (sati) for protecting the
property and harmony of a `joint family'; throwing out peasants from their lands (without
adequate compensation) to build dams, are all instances of an evil outlook that forcefully
sacrifices the individual for so called 'collective' good.

The Gospel of Jesus Christ in contrast, offers salvation to every individual. The individual
bears the image of God, therefore he is the central object of God's love and salvation. It is
the individual who is called to repent of his sin and by faith accept God's offer of
forgiveness and salvation.

Social evils are the consequences of the rule of Satan. Satan has authority over us because
when we choose to sin, we choose to obey him. We are individually responsible for our
sins. Therefore, salvation from sin is the heart of an wholistic reform.

Let us take poverty as an example of social evils, to see in some detail how sin leads to the
misery of poverty and salvation to shalom, i.e., peace with prosperity. Sin is disobedience
of God's law (or obedience of Satan's deception). If for our purposes we look only at the
Ten Commandments as part of God's law for us, we can see how every one of those
commands has a bearing on poverty and prosperity. Needless to say, the Ten
Commandments provide a framework for the whole of life, not just for our economic life.

1 False Gods

While God was leading the Israelites out of the slavery of Egypt to the promised land,
under the leadership of Moses, He spoke to His people on Mount Sinai:

I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. You
shall have no other gods before me (Exod 20:2-3).

In this very first Commandment, God reveals Himself as a saviour from slavery; as one
who delivered His people from oppression and wants to lead them into a land flowing with
milk and honey. He is a personal and moral being - a God of justice and righteousness. He
commands us not to turn to false gods. This is not so much because God is somehow
hungry for our worship, but because when we turn to amoral or immoral gods, we soon
lose our freedoms and find ourselves under oppressive systems.

We have already noted in the previous chapter, and elsewhere I have considered in detail,
the fact that submission to false deities results in poverty. The kingdom of Satan begins
when we turn from the true God to false gods. The personal, moral God is the ultimate
truth of the universe, the starting-point and the reference point of the meaning of
everything else.

The failure to Know the personal God means that we cannot define the human person
either, and as a society we gradually and inevitably sink so deeply into darkness and sin,
that our lack of appreciation of personhood leads to institutionalising even murder.
William Carey, the first British missionary to India, once saw a basket hanging from a tree.
In it lay the body of an infant, half-eaten by white ants and birds. He was shocked to learn
that it was a common practice for parents to starve their unwanted infants to death in this
way, The fact the infanticide had been given socio-religious sanction was totally
intolerable to him. Every year in a festival, parents used to throw their unwanted infants in
the 'holy' River Ganges. Carey, therefore, fought to uphold the dignity and value of human
life by getting this 'religious' ritual banned in the eighteenth century.

Is twentieth-century man any more civilised, more developed? Not really, except in the
sense that he now has the technology to kill as many as 60 million unwanted children
every year before they are born. In some ways `developed' humans are worse. When you
do not acknowledge God as Creator, in whose image man is made, you are forced to define
man with reference to an ape or simply as a complex collection of molecules. No rational
basis remains for treating humans differently form animals or machines.

A society which does not know the Saviour God ultimately loses objective yardsticks for
distinguishing between justice and slavery, oppression and development. How is it, that in
spite of the immense advance in knowledge and power, so many governments in the
twentieth century have been able to justify large-scale oppression in the name of
development or social engineering, and describe slavery as 'revolutionary freedom' of the
left or the right?

It really should not surprise us because the aim of the 'old dragon' is to make nations
worship the 'beast' - the emperors that oppress. Communism is the clearest example of the
folly of modern man who turns away from the Saviour God to put his faith in a party or a
dictator. But Communism is by no means the only such folly. Western secularism also
ends up at the same point denying God and deifying the state. It hardly matters whether we
have a leftist saviour or a rightist saviour. Any deity other than the Saviour, God, will lead
us to bondage and poverty.

2 Worship of Creation
God commands:

You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on
the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship
them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of
the fathers to the third and fourth generations of those who hate me, but showing love
to a thousand generations who love me and keep my commandments (Exod 20:4-6).

Some years ago I was invited to a village where some poor people wanted us to start
development projects. When I reached there, they had just finished cremating a dead body
and were making an offering to demons. My friends proudly showed me their temple in the
middle of the river, which they said was a thousand years old.

I said to them, 'Do you know why you are poor? It is because your forefathers feared and
worshipped the river instead of harnessing its water for your fields.'

Today that village has some believers as well as a government-constructed lift-irrigation

system, which has transformed their agriculture (though the high-caste men have begun to
grab by fraud and force those previously unproductive lands, which the untouchables have
made productive).

When we worship creation we become incapable of exercising dominion over it. A society
which worships the cow, becomes incapable of manipulating or improving its breed. A
tribe which worships the 'mountain god', instead of looking under the mountain for, say,
copper, is doomed to poverty. The tragic consequences of these sins last for generations.

Faith in a personal Creator sets the philosophical framework for faith in an objective,
rational creation, whose laws are both discoverable as well as harnessable by human
rationality because man is made in the image of a personal God. Societies which substitute
faith in a personal Creator for faith in chance or impersonal energy or consciousness,
eventually lose a concept of rational creation altogether and are forced by their own logic
to deify the forces of nature as well as to consider the objective world as somehow unreal,
merely a projection of consciousness.

The eleventh-century Hindu philosopher Shank-aracharya, for example, has been the most
influential thinker of India. He taught strict monism called Advaita Vedanta. According to
him, the diversity or plurality of the world is Maya (illusion) or dream of Brahma
(Universal Consciousness), who is the only reality that exists.

Prior to this teaching, India made significant advances in science, mathematics, astronomy,
architecture, arts, grammar etc. But after Shankara, there was stagnation and deterioration.

This monistic philosophy had two damaging, albeit logical, implications for India.

First, rationality was rejected in favour of mysticism. Our rational consciousness, including
our self-consciousness (sense of individuality) was logically seen as illusory. Rationality
was considered to be the source of our ignorance or bondage, which makes us see
ourselves as distinct individuals instead of God. Meditation, yoga, Tantra etc., became
proper epistemological means to transcend the bondage of rational consciousness and find
reality (Brahma) in mystical experience. The denial of rationality in favour of mysticism
meant that science became impossible.

Second, because reality was thought to be one, it was logical to assume that nothing else
existed except God. Therefore the worship of stone, snake or sex was worship of God. No
wonder that after Shankaracharya Indian society degenerated into superstition, sorcery and
a host of social evils.

The stream of Western thinking which gave up faith in the infinite personal Creator is now
being forced by the logic of its unbelief to give up faith in a rational creation, too. This is
clearly seen in contemporary science fiction movies that grapple with the concept of time
and stretch the Einsteinian concept of space-time continuum to imply that time is illusory.
The film Star Trek IV, for example, explores a reality where the twentieth and twenty-third
centuries exist simultaneously. A person can travel from one to the other in an instant,
providing he has the technology to go fast enough.

Such a view of time could provide no rational basis for development, i,e.,alleviation of
human misery or even ecology with which Star Trek IV is concerned. This view would
ultimately mean that not only time but creation itself is illusory. If the twenty-third century
already exists, why save the whales for it as the heroes of the film do? What significance
can human action have if history is not moving, if we go 'back to the future'? What
significance does man or his work have if time and history are not real?

The pre-Einsteinian rationalists who conceived of time as 'absolute' were wrong. Because
God alone is absolute, time and especially our perception of it cannot be absolute. We
perceive everything from a relative standpoint through various media. When we see a coin,
for example, in a bucket of water, the coin is not where it appears to be, because water has
refracted the rays coming back from the coin. However, the fact that our normal perception
of the coin is inaccurate, does not make the reality of the coin itself illusory. Time is not
absolute but it is real.

God created for six days and rested on the seventh; this means that what came to be on the
second day* was non-existent on the first. Man and creation are also real. But they are not
to be worshipped. God made man from the earth. Therefore man is a part of creation. But
God breathed His spirit in man and therefore he is different from the rest of creation. He
bears the image of the Creator. He is creative. He is to be a worker in God's creation,
exercising dominion over it, not worshipping it. {Insertion from the text: I am not
implying that six days necessarily mean six 24-hour periods. What a day means on earth is
not what it means on Venus or Jupiter. Genesis specifies that by one day is meant one
evening and morning – not 12 or 24 hours.}

Recently, the Prime Minister of India spoke to the United Nations' General Assembly
against the Western tendency to have 'dominion over creation'. He advocated the view that
man should seek harmony with nature, not authority over it. In his own country, however,
he would like to assume authority over people and would have everyone believe that his
exercise of authority is not only good for people but also necessary. And that is true of
course. If men who have greater intelligence than any other creature, need human authority
over them, would not the non-rational things and forces of nature require greater exercise
of intelligent authority over them for order and development?

The Bible says that people who worship dead wood, metal or stones eventually become
dead in their minds, too. Those who worship demons become demonic to the point of
sacrificing their own children to appease their deities.

Another reason why we should not make images of God is because God has made His
image Himself-man. Man is made in the image of God and therefore He is the one to be
respected and served, not the idols made by human hands and imagination. That is sin.

3. Lack of the Fear of God

You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not hold anyone
guiltless who misuses His name (Exod. 20:7).
Gods of stone, wood or metals do not save. But the living God does. He made man in His
own image that man may have fellowship with Him and serve Him. Man has turned away
from Him and consequently gone into slavery. But God still takes the initiative to rescue
man and to enter into a covenant relationship with him. Even though we have sinned and
joined the dark side, He is willing to be our God, our Father. He is willing for us to use His
name, to have all the privileges and power that come from His name. But unlike other gods
and goddesses, He is not a power that men can manipulate for their advantages through
magic, sorcery, rituals, offerings or sacrifices. His name is not a mantra (sacred sound with
occult power) like that of the demons, to be chanted for occultic power of mystical
experiences. He is a person. He is a Holy God-a judge. Therefore, He is to be respected,
worshipped and obeyed.

The proverb says that 'the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom'. A mind which fears
God stays away from evil and loves truth and righteousness. Because it fears God, it ceases
to fear man or the kingdoms of man. It also ceases to fear nature, but sees it as a mission
field.

The first Commandment to have no gods other than the Saviour God deals with the state of
our minds-whether we believe in truth or falsehood. The second and third Commandments
which prohibit the worship of creation and exhort us to revere the living God, deal with the
attitudes that result from our beliefs. It is not enough to believe in the Saviour God. We
must revere Him.

Not taking the name of the Lord in vain implies a deep commitment to walk in integrity,
with a sense of personal responsibility for our thoughts, words and actions. The truth is that
we are morally responsible creatures, therefore accountable to God. This fact demands that
we should build our lives on the foundations of the fear of God.
Can a business enterprise succeed where the workers have no respect for those in authority
over them ? Can the larger human endeavour to find shalom - peace with prosperity -
succeed without a fear of God born of a sense of human accountability to Him? For a finite
creature living in God's universe it is sheer foolishness and arrogance to disregard and
disrespect God. It will not go unpunished. The greatest of human minds are no more than
those of little boys playing with pebbles at the shore of the sea of knowledge. Just as an
astronaut is certain to destroy himself and his spaceship unless he obeys the instructions of
others who are better informed than he, man destroys himself without humility, meekness
and reverence towards the infinite, personal God, the Saviour God who has allowed us to
use His name. This commandment means that He saved Israel from slavery; He is leading
them to prosperity; ut He is a Holy God, not to be taken for granted or used for our vested
interests.

4. Neglect of the Sabbath

Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you shall labour and do all
your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not
do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your manservant or
maidservant, nor your animals, nor the alien within your gates (Exod.20: 8-10).

This fourth Commandment deals with the necessity to work for six days and to rest on the
seventh day. Some people sin by not working diligently for six days, whereas others,
driven by greed, unbelief or other circumstances do not rest on the seventh day. Either way
of breaking this command results in poverty. The necessity of work flows out of man's
special position in the world as God's vice-regent, implied
in the first three Commandments. It is not enough, not to worship creation. God put Adam
in the Garden to 'till it and keep it', therefore human fulfilment comes from work. Not to
work is sin.

A person who makes no distinction between creation and the Creator first begins to
worship creation. Then he interprets creation as somehow unreal, and therefore a life of
work as a life of bondage. His goal or salvation then becomes to go into an ashram (a-
shram or non-labour), away from a life of action to a life of meditation. As the Western
mind increasingly moves away from the Christian World view it also appears to be moving
away from faith in work to a faith in meditation, magic, occultism, spiritism, yoga etc., as
means of acquiring power over creation. Even cult movies such as the Star Wars or Star
Trek series reflect this, often showing magic to be greater and more desirable than the
powers of science and technology. This represents a gradual move of a culture from truth
to deception, from responsible freedom to the slavery to superstitions and demons. We in
India know the result of this intellectual suicide. This Commandment warns against it.

A life of meditation, when it means a negation of work, is a life of suppression of human

creativity or a denial of the image of God in man. It dose not require academic expertise to
know that a culture which does not put a premium on work comes under the grip of
poverty. 'He who works his land will have abundant food, but the one who chases fantasies
will have his fill of poverty' (Prov. 28:19).

P.T. Baur, of the London School of Economics, has challenged the consensus of the
economists who think that the prosperity of a nation depends on its climate and natural
resources. He did his pioneering studies in the rubber industry of South-East Asia in the
1940s and ' 50s and found that the Indians harvested half the rubber that the Chinese did
when they were working on the same plantations. From this he learnt that it is not physical
resources but human values and attitudes that make the critical difference between
prosperity and poverty.

In my own experience of the rural life, I learnt that one important cause of poverty was that
the high-caste Hindus worked only when forced to by necessity; otherwise they generally
considered work to be degrading.

The work ethic of the Indians working for their Government is a handy subject for the
cartoonists. But it is sad that so many of the educated youth in Third World countries bribe
to get a Government job precisely because they believe that it means secured salary, perks
and 'extra income' without much exertion.

The command to work for six days and to rest on the seventh implies that even though the
Saviour God has delivered Israel from slavery in Egypt and is taking them to a promised
land- 'a land flowing with milk and honey' (Deut. 26 and 27)- yet economic prosperity will
not be there lying around to be picked up and enjoyed. No His people will have to work for
it.

Yet work eventually ceases to be meaningful and fulfilling unless it is seen as a part of the
overall purpose of human life in relation to both creation as well as the Creator. If work is
to be a vocation, a 'call' transcending drudgery, then it has to be seasoned with Sabbath
rest. The Sabbath is not merely a physical and mental rejuvenation. It is holy. It is meant to
service our hearts and minds with the divine perspective on life. Therefore, it is primarily a
spiritual rejuvenation. It is the spirit which must govern our minds and bodies. Whether
work is the never-ending drudgery of a housewife washing dishes and mopping floors or a
watchman staying awake night after night, or a strenuous effort of an astronaut in space for
months, the Lord's Sabbath can give meaning and inspiration to make their labour not only
tolerable but also a work of art pleasing and satisfying. By keeping the Sabbath to the Lord
your God' you bring your life and work under God. The work then becomes a 'call' It
inspires the worker to persevere, to work for a cause higher than mere bread and butter.

St Paul says that a man who does not work but steals as his means of livelihood, must
begin to work after he comes to Christ, not merely to be able to work after he comes to
Christ, not merely to be able to eat, but so that he can create enough wealth to be able to
give to those who are in need (Eph. 4:28).

To disobey this command is to sin with far-reaching socio-economic consequences.

5. Dishonour for parents

Honour your father and your mother, so that you may live long in the land (Exod.
20:12).

Man cannot exercise authority over creation, without being himself subject to authority.
Only those who honour authority over them, can handle the power of authority over others.

The family and parental authority are the sources of respect and obedience for authority,
and wisdom comes from age and experience. Honouring parents is the necessary
preparation for a life of useful work, which is taught in the first four Commandments. To
dishonour parents or other authorities is sin: it leads to a chaos of conflicts and
unhappiness. Respect and obedience for authority lead to order, peace, fruitfulness and life.

This fifth command to honour parents underlines the importance of family life. In some
societies individualism is destroying the family. In others, collectivism often destroys the
family as the primary educational and economic unit. Both individualism and
collectivisation are, therefore, sinful.

Israel was a patriarchal, tribal society. The `family' was not merely a social unit, but a
civic, economic, military and political entry, too. So this command implies not simply that
we honour our fathers and mothers but that we be law-abiding citizens, respecting
authority.

We have seen in the previous chapter that an assumption underlying the preaching of the
Kingdom of God was that the Roman empire was the fourth beast of Daniel 7:7 or the
empire of iron of Daniel which was smashed to pieces by the stone of the Kingdom of God
(Dan. 2:34, 44-5). St. Paul learnt from his own experience, however, that the grace of God
was not absent even from wicked, totalitarian kingdoms. The
Jews would have killed Paul, had it not been for the Roman law which held that an accused
had a right to defend himself before a judge as well as to make an appeal to higher
authorities, up to the supreme court of Caesar himself. Therefore Paul taught Christians
living in Rome to pay taxes and respect civic and political authorities (Rom.13:1-7). It is
only by a life of consistent obedience that we earn the right to disobey human authority
when that has to be done in order to obey the higher authority of God.

When family is the business enterprise, it does not require any imagination to see how to
break this Commandment will result in poverty. Can an enterprise be profitable without
respect for and obedience to superiors?

God says we must honour and obey those over us so that we 'may live long in the land'.
One very important cause of the relative weakness of the economic life of Third World
countries is that family-owned economic enterprises are suspected, whereas artificial co-
operatives, societies or state-controlled 'public sector' companies are promoted. More often
than not these ventures fail because they do not do justice to 'human factors' in economic
life. In contrast, Japanese experiment has shown that even large multinational Japanese
experiment has shown that even large multinational companies do better if a family spirit
is injected into management.

But the command to 'honour your father and mother' is not to be obeyed primarily because
of its economic benefits. In fact it is sinful to respect only those who have economic or
intellectual power.
Children may well have more knowledge or money than their parents, but that does not
justify disrespect for poor or illiterate parents. If parents are to love and care for powerless,
illiterate infants then when children grow up, they should reciprocate respect and care for
parents who may by then have become powerless. A society which does not care for
parents will soon lose the rationale for caring for children too. God says that if you wish to
live long in the promised land, you must honour your father and mother. And we should
note that mother is to be respected and obeyed as much as father.

Old-age pensions, retirement benefits and other forms of social securities for the aged are
to be welcomed as positive developments. But when these become substitutes for the love
and care of the children for their parents, then these measures, instead of being expressions
of the respect for the parents, become an expression of the selfish individualism of a
society which is bound to be as destructive of the family as collectivism. The promise of
shalom-that you may live long in the land-is dependent on the continuity of right
relationships in the family

6. Murder

The Commandment 'You shall not murder' (Exod. 20:13) implies that man has a God-
given right to life of which he cannot unjustly be deprived. God is pro-life. Jesus said he
came to give life abundant, whereas the one who gives death is a robber. Man as the
creator of wealth is more important than land, cattle, capital or machine. It is not enough to
respect only God or parents. We must respect all of human life, including those under our
care and authority.

One of earliest lessons I learnt in our development work in the rural areas of a
dacoit(bandit) infested district was that a chief cause of poverty was the absence of the
security which comes from a stable law and order system; where to have wealth means to
invite robbers, people prefer either to remain poor or move out of the villages to the more
secure context of cities. Those who are able to save a little money in the village choose not
to invest it in a rural-based enterprise. The commercial banks are often reluctant to invest
in perfectly viable projects in villages, because of lack of security.

A society which cannot put the security of human life as its top priority cannot hope to rise
above poverty. Therefore the sixth Commandment not to commit murder, is fundamental
for prosperity.

Like all sin, murder begins in our minds, in a lack of a clear understanding of who man is,
in a lack of respect for human life. The evolutionary view that far from being sacred, life
was a product of blind chance meant that Hitler, who believed in the doctrine of the
survival of the fittest, could first order execution of all the terminally sick patients in
Germany and then of six million men, women and children, whose only crime was that
they were born to Jewish parents. Reverence for life implies that our right to life is not
absolute. We do not have a right to suicide. `My life' is not mine-it is God's gift to me.
Besides, I have debts to repay to my family, my society and to my God. So it is important
that we develop an attitude of respect and gratitude for life.

In India socio-religious sanction for murder of infants and burning alive of widows became
possible without any Hindu guru challenging the evil, because the doctrine of reincarnation
of the soul meant that life is not something sacred but a bondage or sansara. The goal
Moksha (Salvation) was understood as cessation of our individual existence, i.e., merging
of our individuality into Brahma (the Impersonal
Consciousness).

Philosophies that imply a low view of human life are to be shunned as evil. But we must
recognise that we may hold to the correct doctrine and yet in practice hate our brothers,,
which, said Jesus, is as bad as murder in God's sight (Matt. 5:21-2).

Today, atheistic secularism justifies taking away human life by giving it a less
objectionable name than murder, such as abortion or euthanasia. Once the doctrine of the
sanctity of life has been rejected and a philosophy of death accepted, we have already lost
the battle for development. For the secular mind, poverty issues are more important than
pro-life issues because it puts the purse above the person. Politicians are always talking
about the poor because the poor have votes whereas unborn babies don't.

Jesus, however, says that human life is far more important than economics, i.e. what we
shall eat or wear (Matthew 6:25-34). The command not to commit murder defines the
boundary of our authority, as well as constantly holding before us the purpose of our
salvation and of all our work, i.e., life.

7. Adultery

God says, 'You shall not commit adultery' (Exod. 20:14). One of my frequent themes in our
villages is that the economic bullock cart of India is moving very slowly because it is being
pulled only by one bull-the male. The woman is usually confined to the chores of the
home. The reason for women's enslavement is rampant sexual immorality. We cannot
afford to give freedom to village girls to go to high schools in towns because we don't trust
our men to leave them alone. Therefore, they often have to remain uneducated, unskilled
and treated as economic liabilities. Even in the West the growing acceptance of the single-
parent family almost inevitably means a poor family, and emotionally handicapped
children. Very often the system of social security gives financial incentive for claimants to
remain single-parent families. This not only impoverishes them but puts a financial strain
on society, too, which ultimately cannot but
be destructive to moral values, to the institutions of marriage, family and economic life as
a whole.
We can give freedom to our women only when we trust our men. Trust is possible only in
a society which has a high sexual ethic. A low sexual ethic first results in the breakdown of
marriage and then eventually in loss of freedom for women, as a means of protecting the
family. Both have far-reaching economic consequences.

In 1980 my wife and I were invited for a lecture tour of Holland. On the first night our
hosts put us up in a Christian hostel in the middle of the 'red light' district of Amsterdam.
In my lectures that week I often joked with my audience.

`I thought I was coming from an underdeveloped country to a developed society. But on

my first night here I learnt that I have come from a culture that is about a thousand years
ahead of yours. What you have in Amsterdam now, we had in our "temples" In Khajuraho
a millennium ago and we know well where that road leads.'

Young people today often live in tension. On the one hand, there is the tradition that you
can depend on your parents for financial needs only as long as you are unmarried. On the
other hand, the marriage age is being pushed back because of the need for academic
specialisation to get good jobs. More and more people are resorting to premarital sexual
relationships. In some countries this seems to be gaining social acceptance.

There can be no doubt that once sex is permitted outside of marriage, there is not much
hope of protecting the institutions of marriage and family. The way out of the dilemma
should be family support for married children, instead of encouraging them by default to
live together before being married.

To break God's law for personal convenience is extremely dangerous and in the long run
destructive of stability, peace and prosperity.

During 1975-7 when India went through its brief phase of totalitarianism called
'Emergency', I was amazed to discover that even our population control measure-of
forcefully sterilising men-failed in spite of the brutal use of the state power because of the
low sexual ethic in the countryside. It was the village women who resisted the programme.
The reason was simple-if they became pregnant after their husbands had had a vasectomy,
how could they 'show their faces to anyone'? They did not think that it was possible for
them to protect themselves from the lust of other men around them. Therefore the could
not allow their husbands to go through the vasectomy operation. Thus the sin of adultery
became the real hindrance to the control of a growing population.

8. Theft

The Commandment 'You shall not steal' (Exod. 20:15) implies that I have a right to
property of which I cannot be deprived unjustly. Security of life and property create a
context in which economic development can take place. A society which cannot protect the
wealth of its citizens from thieves or a state which robs its citizens of their wealth through
unjust tax structures or by denying them the right to property, cannot hope to get out of the
clutches of poverty. On the other hand, if the citizens steal the taxes which should go to the
Government, they impoverish and weaken their society. Therefore, the command 'You
shall not steal' is another pillar on which a prosperous society stands. The sin of theft
breeds poverty.

The Indian Government is rocked today by scandals that almost two hundred and fifty
thousand million rupees have been hidden away by Indians in foreign banks as 'black
money'. Much of this money has been generated by the politicians and bureaucrats as
illegal bribes on imports and exports. But much of it is also money generated by legitimate
business which is not brought into the country to evade taxes. The businessmen feel that
the Government will steal their money through unjust taxation. So they prefer to steal taxes
from the Government themselves. We have a joke: When a politician steals public property
in the West he goes to jail; when he steals it in India, he goes to the West-preferably to the
Swiss banks. Some national leaders feel that the present situation is worse than the British
Raj taking away to England the wealth that Indians had created.

One of the ways in which the business community stole the wealth of the ordinary people
in Biblical days was through 'unjust weights and measures'. Moses prohibited such theft in
his law. The prophets denounced it as sin. But today many economies lower the value of
their currency as the simplest way of stealing the wealth of the people-in the name of
'development'. When people ultimately lose faith in Governments' paper money, the
country goes through the upheavals of bankruptcy.

This practice of stealing by devaluing currency, which is the modern equivalent of using
changeable weights and measures, seriously hinders progress in poor countries. It serves as
a disincentive to saving. A person who saves a hundred thousand rupees to enable his child
to start a commercial enterprise may find that by the time the child is ready, the value of
his savings has gone down to (say) only seventeen thousand rupees. In contrast, a person
who had taken a loan of a hundred thousand rupees may find that it was very profitable to
have been in debt because the real value of his liability over the years has decreased on its
own to only seventeen thousand rupees. It then becomes wiser to have liabilities instead of
savings, for fear of theft of its people's savings by the state, cannot get out of its poverty.

Property rights, like the 'right to life' are not absolute. In the Jubilee legislation, for
example, the Lord says, 'The land must not be sold permanently, because the land is mine'
(Lev. 25:23). A man who becomes a drunkard or a gambler cannot have the right to sell off
his capital assets on the grounds that 'it is my land' any more than he can take his own life
on the plea that 'it is my life'. Ultimately the land is not his. It is God's gift to him. He is
required develop it for his children and grandchildren, not fritter it away.

Some interpreters think that Leviticus 25:23 implies that we have no property rights. Form
God's statement 'the land is mine,' they somehow derive a socialism which says 'the land is
the state's ' Nothing could be farther from the truth. Jubilee law implies that private
ownership is so fundamental that basic capital assets in Israel could not even be sold. This
is not a question of taking sides in an academic debate between the right and the left. The
future of a whole society depends on whether or not its people have security of property
rights. A man is likely to recharge his soil and develop his land best, if he knows that his
descendants have to live off that land for generations to come. The family ownership of
capital is the best way to preserve and strengthen the eco-system. The ideologies that deny
property rights to families destroy their capital. Why would a man plant a tree and nurture
it unless he is either paid for it or he has a reasonable basis for thinking that his children
and grandchildren will get the timber and fruit from that tree? It is folly to deny property
rights to people and then demand that they plant trees or recharge soil. Economic
development is built on the foundation of security to property implied in the command,
„Thou shall not steal.‟

9 False Witness

You shall not give false testimony against your neighbour (Exod.20:16).

Personal integrity is fundamental for a just social order. A few years ago a Sikh, who had
done business both in India and England for years, taught me the significance of honesty to
poverty and prosperity.

He said to me, „Why don‟t you settle in England and do business here; it is very easy and
much more rewarding.‟

I was surprised how a man who could not speak one correct sentence in English could
succeed in business in England. So I asked him, „Why is business easier in England than in
India?‟

„Because everyone believes you here, „was his reply. As a businessman he knew the
relationship of truthful witness to the economic prosperity of a society.

Successful commercial activity is built on trust, which in turn depends on the truthfulness
of the people.
Where people do not respect their own words, they create conditions of conflict, chaos and
suffering.
They build a society on the premise of distrust.

In 1980, I walked with a friend in Holland to a dairy farm. There was no one in the sales
room. He opened the tap of the milk container and filled his jug. Then he put a banknote in
the money bowl lying there, took out the change from the bowl, put it in his pocket and
started walking back home.

I was amazed. „If it were India,‟ I said, „you would probably take home both the milk and
the money. But then, in a flash of insight, I saw the relationship of moral integrity to
economic prosperity.

„If the farmer had to employ a salesman,‟ I said, „our children would get less milk than
they do now, because it would be more expensive. In any case, if people are dishonest
how can you trust a salesman? We have milkmen in India, but we can never trust that they
have not mixed water in the milk.‟

In 1983, I was again in Holland, waiting with my daughter for a tram in Amsterdam. I
asked two American girls, Where can I buy tickets for the public transport system?

„Why do you want to buy tickets?‟ they asked, rather surprised, and added, „We have been
going round the town for three days now, and no one has bothered to check whether or not
we‟ve bought tickets.‟

„You should be grateful,‟ I said, „that you still have enough honest people here that the
system can cope with a few dishonest ones. If the proportion of the dishonest grew, then
they would have to employ inspectors to check your tickets and then the tickets would cost
more. Dishonesty would spread to the management and maintenance of these trams, too,
and you would have too many break-downs and accidents, and you would wreck a
beautiful system.‟

In one of our projects we enable peasants to solar dry potatoes in to wafers. Then we grind
the wefers into potato powder. One peasant farmer whose family has found this to be a
very profitable project was pleading with me, „Why don‟t you allow me to set up a
grinding unit in my own home for making powder?‟

I replied, „If we can set up the powder-making unit in your home we can sell powder
cheaper than anyone else in the world, because we shall eliminate packing, transporting,
warehousing costs of wafers. But the problem is that wheat flour is so much cheaper than
potato powder. How can be I sure that you will not mix it in the potato powder to make
more money? The costs of dishonesty in India are so high that the Dutch can sell their
powder to us much cheaper than we can sell ours in our own country.‟

The consequences of dishonesty on economic life are bad enough, but when false
witnesses destroy a judicial system, then a society has to reconcile itself to living in
oppression and violence. Principles of justice and civilisation then give way to the law of
the jungle-„might is right.‟ Eventually the judiciary and the State themselves lose all
legitimacy because the State becomes most corrupt and oppressive in using the judiciary to
pervert justice. Stalin and other Communist dictators made a mockery of justice in
eliminating millions of their opponents through sham judicial trials, which were among the
darkest episodes of our century. But even in countries like India which have inherited a fair
and independent judiciary from the British, the ruling powers are now using the judiciary
to protect criminals and harass and punish political opponents through resort to false
witness. This cannot but destroy the legitimacy of the State itself.

10 Covetousness

You shall not covet your neighbour‘s house. You shall not covet your neighbour‘s wife,
of his manservant or maidservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your
neighbour (Exod. 20:17).
The tenth Commandment takes the earlier nine Commandments from the external sphere -
idolatry, murder, theft, adultery, etc., to the inner attitude. Our faith in God‟s goodness and
love for us must result in contentment and thankfulness. Our respect for our neighbours
and their property must mean that we work for what we want to and need to have, instead
of coveting what our neighbours have. I must create a house I can be proud of instead of
coveting my neighbour‟s I must work at loving my own wife, to have happiness in my
home.

Under the impact of Socialist thinking, many of our leaders in India and in some other
Third World countries have told us that we are poor because the Western world is
exploiting us. The way out of poverty, therefore, is for us to get their money. All
exploitations, of course, must cease- though we must realise that often our own leaders are
the greatest exploiters of our countries - but coveting our neighbour‟s wealth ultimately is
an attitude that cannot help. If I have a right to enjoy the wealth I create, so does my
neighbour. Exploitation is nothing but the result of covetousness.
Not having a covetous disposition means not only contentment, thankfulness and
industriousness - to earn what we want - but also an attitude of loving our neighbour and
giving of ourselves to others. We have a right to protect our properties, but it does not
mean that we should hoard what we have, irrespective of the needs of others around us.
Not being covetous means that we respect and care for our neighbour‟s rights and needs.
This creates the environment of harmony and co-operative action necessary to fulfil our
human destiny on earth.

Covetousness is a result of our lack of faith in God and a lack of love for our neighbours.
That is why it is a destructive sin.

Sinfulness, Repentance and the Dignity of Man

A reform movement is built on the assumption that man- including the insignificant and
enslaved man - is worth fighting for. How does the Christian view that man is a sinner
provide the basis for a fight for the dignity of man?

Logically man became human - a creature endowed with free will and moral choice - only
when he was given the command, „Thou shalt not.‟ The concepts of responsibility and
dignity have no meaning without a real choice being given to man. The command gives
man the opportunity to exercise his free will. Instead of obeying his instincts alone, he can
make real moral choices too. Instead of obeying instructions as a robot, he can choose to
obey out of love and gratitude.

It was unfortunate that man exercised the option of choosing to disobey, to sin, to alienate
himself from his Creator. The choice to sin meant believing something false and following
Satan. By his choice man went from light into darkness. His mind was darkened; his heart
was hardened; and his conscience became increasingly insensitive to truth. The spiritual
life of man was dead. He ceased to have fellowship with God and he grew to love the
darkness of evil. He became a slave to sin, that is, increasing compromise with sin meant
decreasing freedom and power to choose what is right (Rom.7:14-24). As sinner man is
guilty-worthy not of respect but of punishment, of eternal separation from God, i.e., hell.

But the Good News is that man is still an object of God‟s love. God loved man enough to
send Jesus to take man‟s sin upon Himself on the cross. Jesus became sin for us. He took
our punishment. He died so that we may find forgiveness and life; so that we may come
out of darkness into the joy of God‟s light. For a sinner, a life of dignity begins in
repentance. The view that the human creature has a dignity means that man is a responsible
creature. Individuals are personally responsible for sin. To repent is to own responsibility
for one‟s choices.

As slaves of sin we may have forfeited the power to choose what is right, but we have not
lost the ability to choose to repent of our sin. A great man is one who shoulders great
responsibilities. True greatness therefore must begin by owning responsibility for oneself.
For a sinner who has broken God‟s Commandments to own responsibility means to repent;
to ask for forgiveness; to get right with God; to be born again; to get out of the slavery of
Satan and begin a life of obedience to God-a life of responsibility to walk in truth, in the
light. This is salvation-to find forgiveness and reconciliation with God through repentance
and faith. This is also the beginning of a holistic reform.

Ordering our lives conscientiously, or walking moment by moment with a deep sense of
personal responsibility within the framework of truth, releases that human initiative,
energy and creativity which can generate prosperity and lasting peace.

Salvation and Social Reform

The God who set the Jews free from the slavery of Egypt told them how they could both
maintain this freedom and turn it into prosperity.

So be careful to do what the Lord your God has commanded you; do not turn aside to
the right or the left. Walk in all the way that the Lord your God has commanded you,
so that you may live and prosper and prolong your days in the land that you will
possess (Deut. 5:32-3).

Sin breeds poverty, Repentance from sin and obedience of faith result in shalom.

St. Paul says that salvation means that a man, who was dead in transgressions and sins, has
died with Christ -because Christ died for our sins-and has risen with Christ to newness of
life. „Therefore, if anyone is in Christ he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has
come‟(2 Cor. 5:17).

The renewal of society begins with renewal of individuals who pass from death to life,
from unrighteousness to righteousness. It is a modern folly to assume that the Key to the
economic prosperity of a society depends primarily on its collective programmes,
communes or cooperatives. This misguided belief moves even Christians to spend their
energies in trying to work exclusively for „community organisation‟ or „community
development‟. The fact is that very often no entity called „community‟ exists in a given
situation. In our villages, for example, where many Christians and secular groups are
working for „community development‟ nothing called community exists. What exist as
social realities are individuals, families and castes. A reform movement which seeks to go
to the roots, must therefore go to the individuals and families.

The true key to shalom lies with the quality of life the people lead. It will help us to see
the relationship of salvation to social reform if we see the necessity of relating justice to
righteousness. The Scriptures say that justice and righteousness are the pillars of God‘s
throne, i. e. Kingdom. In the Kingdom of Satan the two are separated.

Righteousness is the personal dimension of moral law; justice is its societal expression.
More often than not, the world replaces righteousness with ideology. Then ideology, not
rightness of an act, determines whether it is judged just or unjust. The consequences of this
are terrible.

For example, the Bible says that a dispute should be settled on the basis of right or wrong
(righteousness), and the judge should show partiality neither to the rich nor to the poor
(Leviticus 19:15). In many countries, such as India, socialistic ideology says that the law
should protect the interest of the poor. A landlord or landlady is assumed to be rich and a
tenant to be poor. The tenant can stay in the house and not pay the rent for years, but the
landlord cannot get possession of the house without prolonged, expensive litigation. The
result is that people consider it foolish to invest their wealth in building houses and renting
them out. They prefer to hide their money in secret Swiss accounts, away from the sight of
the tax authorities. The poor then have to live in slums or in the streets because wealth is
not being invested in the business of housing - which should normally be a very attractive
business, considering the demand.

Illustrations can be multiplied to show that if justice is separated from righteousness or

God‘s moral law and attached to an ideology, then justice becomes oppression and hurts
the poor and the weak whom the ‗ideology‘ was seeking to serve in the first place. It is like
Communist ideology which claims to be the dictatorship of the proletariat but ends by
denying the proletariat the rights to organise themselves into unions or even to speak freely
in their „own‟ system.

When Jesus asked us first to seek the Kingdom of God and His righteousness (justice?)
before bread and clothes are added unto us (Matt. 6:33), he spelt out the necessity of
salvation to shalom.

In search of bread the poor are not to follow the revolutionary who takes up the banner of
justice rooted in ideology, even if argument is that God is biased towards the poor,
therefore the state and the law should also be biased. God is concerned with righteousness.
He calls the poor to repent of their sin, including their sin of faith in the secularised idols of
ideologies. Salvation (or clothing ourselves with righteousness) has to precede shalom.
Justice must grapple with issues of righteousness (right and wrong) or the personal
dimensions of moral law.

Salvation is necessary for social reform because the Kingdom of God is built on
righteousness and justice, whereas the kingdom of Satan is often built on ideology and
injustice.

In the preceding pages we have seen the roots of social evils in our individual sin and of
shalom in our righteousness. But it is important to remind ourselves that social reform is
dealing with societal issues. As individual may be righteous, freed from the power of sin in
life and yet not be free to be his creative, enterprising self in his own country.

For example, simple hard-working Indians perform economic wonders in Europe or

America or ever in some Asian and African countries - where they may not even have the
elementary political power of a vote. But within India the same people find that they
cannot prosper because they do not have the right political connections. The political-
economic Satan has been bent by the powerful to suit their vested interests. In such
situations the tasks of the reformer is to break the chains of oppression, so that the
individuals are free to be themselves. Therefore, having reminded ourselves that socio-
political freedom is worth something only if the people are free from the power of sin in
their individual lives, we should briefly reconsider the significance of the role of an
evangelist to the issues of social reform.

As evangelist who seeks to convince people that they are not just living in the kingdom of
Satan, but that they are personally responsible for sin, spreads critical awareness. He seeks
to inspire people with hope for a better future. He gives them faith that a change for the
better is possible. He seeks to bring them out of the kingdom of Satan, into the Kingdom of
God -to a state of heart, where individuals will bow before God and refuse to compromise
with evil, even if it costs them their lives. Thus the evangelist becomes the forerunner,
pioneer or leader of a reform movement.

Paul : An Evangelist

Paul has become a model of an evangelist who holds evangelism to be his priority and
sticks to it. Paul claimed that he preached nothing but Christ and Him crucified. He
exhorted Timothy to do the work of an evangelist (2 Tim.4:5). But for Paul, evangelism
was a most potent, viable and God-given tool for reform.

Paul‟s evangelism did not aim at simply renewing people‟s hearts. Christ, according to
Paul, was making all things new (2 Cor. 5:17). Salvation begins in the heart, transforms
the mind and is expressed in the behaviour, life-style and relationships of an individual
(Rom. 12), who becomes a new man in Christ. But Paul was excited about the great
mystery of the Gospel because it was creating a new race (Eph. 2:11-12). Existing religion
had become walls that separated Jews and Gentiles. The Gospel was breaking down
barriers-the very things which gave social identity to people. The Gospel was creating a
new man. That is why Paul‟s preaching of salvation was seen as a threat to the social
status quo and opposed both by Jews and Gentiles.

Paul: A Reformer

Paul was persecuted because he was perceived to be a troublemaker, a man who was
turning the status quo upside down by his preaching. The Thessalonian Jews said to the
city officials, „These men [Paul and Silas] who have caused trouble all over the world have
now come here‟ (Acts 17:6). The Jewish lawyer Tertullus accused Paul before King Felix,
„We have found this man to be a troublemaker, stirring up riots among the Jews all over
the world‟ (Acts 24:5).

When Paul was arrested in Jerusalem (Acts 21), he was at the temple. He did not believe
in Jewish ritualism, yet under advice from James and the elders of the Jerusalem church, he
was financing the purification ritual of four Jewish converts. Paul willingly submitted to
what he believed to be slavery, i. e., economic exploitation in the name of religion (Gal.3
and 4), in the larger interest of the fellowship of believers and in order to earn the right to
be heard within the Jerusalem church.

Paul was not evangelising in Jerusalem, but keeping a low profile. Yet he was the one who
was arrested. James and the other elders were „converting‟ the Jews, but they were not
arrested. Paul who was not witnessing about Jesus, but observing Jewish rituals, was
arrested and the Jews were anxious to do away with his life. Why?

James, the Jewish converts and other evangelists were not persecuted because „all of them
are zealous for the law‟ (Acts 21:10). They were part of the Jewish sub-culture. Their
message no longer had a cutting edge in their society.

Paul, however, was arrested, not because he was preaching the ‗simple Gospel‘ but
because the Jews said that he ‗is the man who teaches all men everywhere against our
people and our law and this place [the temple]‘ (Acts 21:28).

Jesus had taught that Israel needed to do only two things for salvation, i. e. repent and
believe in Him. The implication of this is that the Jewish Establishment had become
irrelevant for Israel‘s salvation. The temple, in fact, had become ‗a den of robbers‘ (Matt.
21:13), the Jewish leaders had become a pack of ‗wolves‘ (Matt.10:16). Jesus had
rejected the temple and declared that it would be so thoroughly destroyed, that not even
two stones would remain joined (Matt.24:2). The temple, the heart of the Jewish
Establishment, had become the seat of corruption, exploitation and oppression of the
common man. God, the Father, had vindicated Christ‘s rejection of the temple when He
made the curtain of the temple split in two from top to bottom (Matt.27:51).

Yet, the temple and the Jewish legalism which Jesus had rejected were gradually creeping
back into the life of the early Church. The Church was becoming culturally contained
within the Jewish status quo. Instead of setting people free from the slavery of the law and
the Jewish Establishment, their evangelism was beginning to reinforce their hold. The
elders of the Jerusalem church seemed pleased that the new converts were ‗zealous for the
law‘. The Church stood in danger of becoming a tool of the corrupt oppressive
Establishment. No wonder it was no longer persecuted. It wasn‘t a threat any more. But
Paul was still a troublemaker. He had been insisting that Christians who were not living
out the social implications of the Gospel were hypocrites (Gal.2:11-13), carnal (3:1-3) and
cowards (6:12). They were compromising with the Gospel because they did not want to be
persecuted. Paul insisted that Christians who were compromising with the surrounding
Jewish culture by going back to the law were not merely backsliders; they were
backsliding away from the grace of Christ into slavery from which Christ had set them free
(Gal.5:1-12).

Paul said that he was not persecuted because he preached the cross (everybody did that)
but because he preached cross only (Gal.5:11; 1Cor. 2:2). The ‗cross only‘ meant that
circumcision, law, the temple and sacrifices were irrelevant. These were religious means
of enslaving people, and slavery was not an abstract concept but social oppression and
economic exploitation. The Gospel, for Paul, was the power of God for salvation, not only
from sin but from slavery to the law as well. It was a force for reform.

Therefore, even though Paul asked Timothy to teach the churches to pray for kings and
authorities so that Christians might lead peaceful and quiet lives (1 Tim.2:2), he also told
him in unqualified terms that ‗everyone who wants to live godly life in Christ Jesus will be
persecuted‘(2 Tim. 3:12). A Christian does not seek to create trouble, but he does because
he is personally and stubbornly committed to live a godly life in a crooked generation. He
is committed to preach truth in a society which is built on falsehood. If one is to bear
witness to truth in such a way that it will destroy the very foundations of the wickedness of
the society in which he lives-he indeed needs power. And to that subject we now turn.
4

THE HOLY SPIRIT AND SOCIAL REFORM:

YOU SHALL RECEIVE POWER

Just before His ascension Jesus said to His disciples, `But you will receive power
when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses...`(Acts 1:8).
Superhuman power is needed for witness if it means calling not only individuals but
rulers themselves to acknowledge Jesus as Lord, to repent from their evil ways; to
reform. God said to the prophet Ezekiel that he was being sent not to a people who
would respond to his preaching in great numbers, but to a people who would not listen
because they were' hardened and obstinate'. Therefore, God said, 'I will make your
forehead like the hardest stone, harder than flint. Do not be afraid of them' (Ezek. 3:7-
9). Jesus's promise of power came in response to the disciples' question, 'Lord are you
at this time going to restore the Kingdom to Israel?' (Acts 1:6). Jesus said that their
attitude should not be to know the time and merely wait for God to usher in His
Kingdom. Rather,their job was to go into the world, filled with divine power, and
boldly witness to the kingship of Jesus, bringing the world into subjection to the
authority and rule of God (see Acts 1:8, Matt. 28:18-20). That is 'evangelism'. That is
also the reform of a rebellious and corrupt humanity.

After the disciples were baptised by the Holy Spirit, Peter, quoting the prophet Joel,
said that the result of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit would be that young men
would see visions, old men would dream dreams and all God's men and women would
prophesy (Acts 2:17-18).

In the Old Testament, Joel painted that grand picture of what the restoration of Israel
would mean. Restoration was not merely deliverance from foreign rulers and an
abundance of food, fruit and wine (Joel 2:18-22). It was also an outpouring of God's
Spirit and a great outburst of inspired, healthy and positive creativity manifesting
itself in a quality of life and godly culture that brings praise to God (Joel 2:26-9).

In a stagnant and enslaved society, old men do not dream dreams; they mourn for
bygone glories. Young men are not inspired by visions of hope for the future; they
resign themselves to live with the present static reality of despair and gloom. The
creative springs of life dry up, and there is no song of praise in the hearts of slaves.
People perish because there is no prophetic vision. No one speaks for justice and truth
with the freedom and authority of God. Not only the masses but also the mighty bow
before evil and prefer to be discreetly quiet.

Israel had been a stagnant, enslaved society till the day of Pentecost. Individuals like
John the Baptist and Jesus had been murdered, but no one had the courage to speak
for justice and truth. The outpouring of the Holy Spirit made the difference between
death and life. An ordinary man like Peter became like a mighty prophet of old. With
the thundering authority of divine courage, he confronted Israel with their cowardice
and cruelty in crucifying Christ. That was powerful prophetic witness to the truth.
With the coming of the breath of God the dry bones had come to life and become a
mighty army (see Ezek. 37:1-14).

Power Through the Spirit of Knowledge

Jesus promised the power of the Holy Spirit to His disciples in order to make them
“witnesses”. Who is a witness? One who has power or the one who knows? Confusion
at this point has meant that today Christian spirituality has changed from “Knowing
God” to “having power”. A witness is a person who knows. The apostles were eye-
witnesses to Jesus Christ because, they said, they had known Him “the whole time the
Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from John‟s baptism to the time
when Jesus was taken up from us” (Acts 1:21-22). Apostle John authenticates the
apostles‟ right to be witnesses to Jesus Christ on the grounds that they knew what they
were talking about:

“That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with
our eyes, which we looked at and our hands have touched - this we proclaim
concerning the Word of life. The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and
we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us.
We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard…” (1 John 1:1-3).

Why is reform needed? What destroys a nation or a civilization? A study of history

confirms what the Scriptures affirm: “My people are destroyed from a lack of
knowledge” (Hosea 4:6) and, “a people without understanding will come to ruin”
(Hosea 4:14). God complained through the prophet Isaiah that the problem with his
people was that “Israel does not know, my people do not understand” (Isaiah 1:3). As
a result, God lamented, “my people will go into exile for lack of understanding”
(Isaiah 5:13).

Apostle Paul never came to India, but he diagnosed the root of India‟s problems
correctly when he said that people who suppress the Truth about the Creator with an
unrighteous worship of creation, demons or mythological gods degenerate and decay
(Romans 1:18-32). Paul‟s diagnosis was based on this knowledge of Jewish, Greek
and Roman history and societies. God grieves for His children who sell themselves
into slavery by choosing untruth, because His overall purpose is to bless all the
nations of the earth.

The Bible is a collection of sixty-six books, written by at least forty different people,
over a period of sixteen hundred years, in different countries and languages. What
makes it one book? One of the threads that makes the Bible one book by tying the
plots of the sixty-six books into an overarching grand plot is God‟s promise to
Abraham that through his offspring, He plans to bless all the nations of the earth
(Genesis 12:3; 15:5; 18:18; 26:4; 28:4,14; Deut. 9:5; Psalm 72:17; Isa. 19:25; Matt.
28:18-19; Acts 1:8, 2:5-11, 3:25, 17:6; Galatians 3:8; Revelation 21: 24-26, 22:2). So
how is God going to resolve the contradiction between His plan to bless all the
nations of the earth, and the degeneration of the nations because of their attachment to
falsehood. Isaiah, inspired by the Holy Spirit prophesied that when idolatry has
destroyed his nation, when the glorious dynasty of David has been reduced to a mere
stump because of its patronage of idolatry, God Himself will take an initiative:
―A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse;
from his roots a Branch will bear fruit.
―The spirit of the Lord will rest on him - the
spirit of wisdom and of understanding,
the spirit of counsel and of power, the sprit of
knowledge and of the fear of the Lord -‖

Notice the promised Spirit is not a spirit of irrational hysteria, of rolling on the floor
and barking like dogs. He is the Spirit of knowledge, wisdom, understanding and
counsel and of a power which flows out of wisdom. It is the Spirit of knowledge that
is needed because it is for a lack of knowledge that the nations perish. God promises
to pour the Spirit of knowledge upon His servant, so that through him, Isaiah
continues, He may fill the earth with the knowledge of God as the waters cover the
sea (Isa. 11:9).

Knowledge, as we said earlier, is imperative to make us witnesses. But knowledge

alone is not enough. Suppose you witness a murder committed by a gang of criminals
in Bombay who have powerful political and police connections, without an inner
source of power can you stand in a witness box and testify that this gang of chief-
priests, Herods and Pilates crucified an innocent man? No, you may know, but you
dare not be a witness without power, especially if yours is aimed at uprooting a
wicked and brutal power-structure wedded to oppression and injustice. A radical
witness that goes to the root of the issues of injustices in a society is a prophetic
witness.

Gift of the Spirit: Prophecy

The New Testament talks of many gifts and the manifold fruit of the Holy Spirit in the
lives of believers. We need to look at one gift - prophecy - and one fruit - love, to see
how the power of the Holy Spirit is essential for social reform. The New Testament
Church considered prophecy as more important than the other gifts of the Holy Spirit,
since prophecy is the reforming witness to the truth of God (Rev. 11:3, 19:10).

Today, the terms prophecy and evangelism are often kept strictly distinct. That
distinction may have academic value. In real life they are not separate. For example,
in 1 Corinthians 14, where Paul exhorts believers to seek the gift of prophecy, he says
that if an unbeliever walked into a Christian meeting where everybody was
prophesying, 'he will be convinced by all that he is a sinner...and the secrets of his
heart will be laid bare. So he will fall down and worship God...' (vv. 24-5). Thus
prophesying and evangelising are not two distinct activities. An evangelistic message
from God is a prophetic message.
In the New Testament sense it is usually called evangelistic rather than prophetic
because the emphasis of this message is on evangel or good news of forgiveness
rather than judgment as was often the case in Old Testament prophecy.

A prophet is an evangelist because he primarily brings God's promise of forgiveness

and salvation instead of judgment. Therefore, when the New Testament asks us to
seek the gift of prophecy, it asks us to be evangelists. We are to preach repentance to
our generation. Repentance not only for immoral behaviour but also for untrue beliefs.
One reason why the Church is so ineffective today is that even though we do speak
against personal sin, we choose not to challenge the falsehood which our society
believes in. In India we find evangelists preaching against smoking and drinking, but
we rarely find someone preaching against idolatry. Yet false belief is the foundation
of many a human misery, as we have seen in the previous chapter. Because our
message rarely touches the miseries of the common man, it does not appear to many
to be good news. The Holy Spirit gives us the power for being a reforming witness
because He gives us the gift of prophecy, which includes the power to judge and
protest against the evils of the kingdom of Satan.

The Power to Judge and Protest

Proclaiming Jesus as the King of Heaven does not generally result in persecution. But
when we start proclaiming Him as the Ruler of the kings of the earth, we invite
trouble. Because then we automatically judge the world around us by the yardstick of
His justice and righteousness and demand that His will ought to be done on earth as it
is in Heaven.

It takes enormous power and discernment to judge the powers and principalities
which are committed to corruption and cruelty. But that is what Peter, empowered by
the Holy Spirit, was doing in his sermon on the day of Pentecost. He charged his
audience with the sin of cruel murder: '. . .you with the help of wicked men, put Him
to death by nailing Him to the cross' (Acts2:23). And again, 'Therefore let all Israel be
assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ
'(v.36). The Bible records that with many other words, he (Peter) warned them, and he
pleaded with them, 'Save yourselves from this corrupt generation' (v.40). That was
prophetic evangelism.

Such prophetic evangelism judged a specific sin, which in fact was the extent of blind,
naked, unashamed cruelty to which that society had degenerated. Peter also judged the
fear, cowardice and the blindness of the masses which allowed corrupt rulers to kill a
good, innocent man, whom the people themselves acknowledged as a prophet from
God. This fearful cowardice which permitted evil to reign was one of the main causes
of the injustice in their corrupt society.

Peter's exhortation to 'save yourselves from this corrupt generation' was not merely a
message of repentance from private sins. It was a continuation of the theme of the
kingdom of Satan versus the Kingdom of God, started by John the Baptist.
Proclamation of Jesus as Christ was a proclamation of His Kingship; of the beginning
of the renewal of Israel; of the start of the Kingdom of God.

The crucifixion of a righteous man was a symptom of the degeneration of a whole

society. That symptom was what Peter attacked. In those public statements' made at
the risk of his life, Peter was judging the evils of his day, protesting against them
publicly and calling for repentance and change. His accusations were so pointed and
so directly against the unjust official stand of the state (i.e., Jesus was a criminal) that
his hearers had no option but to repent or to kill him. That was prophetic evangelism
at its best.

This kind of witness obviously calls for great power and one major aspect of the
power of the Holy Spirit is the power to judge the world.
When St. Paul said in 1 Corinthians 4:20, 'For the kingdom of God is not a matter of
talk but of power,' what did he mean? The context clearly means the power to judge,
the power to 'whip' (v.21). Paul confronted the sin of adultery in the Church at
Corinth. He said that the Church ought to have the power to judge the adulterer,
'When you are assembled in the name of our Lord Jesus and I am with you in spirit,
and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, hand this man over to Satan, so that his
sinful nature may be destroyed...'(1 Cor. 5: 4-5). The Holy Spirit, especially the gift of
tongues. Paul told them that the power of the Kingdom is not manifested by words
alone, but in the authority to judge and punish sin.

Christian officers in the government of India and in the secular world are often
respected for their integrity and ethical standards, but the same cannot always be said
about some of the leadership of churches and Christian institutions. And even Church
leaders who have personal integrity do not always seem to have the power to judge
the sin within the Church. But is this power to be exercised only within the Church?
Paul goes on to say in the same context that the saints have to judge the world (1 Cor.
6:2). Are we going to judge the world only after Christ returns?

In the judicial sense of the word „judgment‟ (which carries with it the authority to
punish), the saints will judge the world after Jesus returns (1 Cor. 5:9-12;Rev. 2:26-
7;20:4-6). But in the moral and prophetic sense of the word judgment, our task begins
when we are empowered by the Holy Spirit. Jesus said, When he [the Spirit] comes,
He will convict the world of guilt in regard to sin and righteousness and judgment'
(John 16:8). How will the Spirit convict the world? Obviously through the Spirit-
filled believers.

But if we judge the sin of the world, the world is bound to persecute us. Jesus was not
killed because He showed the way to Heaven to man. He said that the world 'hates me
because I testify that what it does is evil' (John 7:7). We have to witness or testify not
merely about who Jesus is but also what the world is. The Bible says that we must
expose the works of darkness (Eph. 5:11). We need power to do that because when
we judge the world, the world retaliates by judging us. Stephen was stoned to death
because he said to the Jews in Jerusalem,

―You stiff-necked people, with uncircumcised hearts and ears! You are just like
your fathers: You always resist the Holy Spirit. Was there ever a prophet your
fathers did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the
Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered Him‖ (Acts 7:51-2).

That was prophetic witness and it requires power from above. Even the mighty men
of this world are usually too weak to stand as witnesses against the evils of their
contemporary powers and principalities. They consider compromise to be wisdom.
For example, the ministers (and intelligence officers) in a given government know the
corruption among their colleagues. But they accuse each other of corruption, in
generalities only, after they have fallen apart with their comrades.

God's holiness means that He hates evil. His hatred is expressed in two ways - He
saves men from sin and He also judges sin. Salvation and judgment are the
inseparable sides of the same coin - God's holiness and hatred of evil. The Church as
Christ's body is meant to be both an agent of salvation and an agent of His justice.
The loss of this balanced perspective has robbed the Church of her dynamism to
transform society. Protestantism no longer protests against evil, because it sees itself
merely as a channel of God's salvation and not of God's justice. What does it if mean
for Jesus to be the Ruler of the kings of the earth if He does not judge them? What
good is it His Spirit does not empower those whom He fills to pronounce prophetic
judgment?

After His resurrection Jesus said, 'All authority in heaven and on earth has been given
to me' (Matt. 28:18). Paul said that the Head of the Church is already seated on the
throne above all powers, principalities and rulers of this world (Eph. 1:20-3). This
means that Christ's Body has to carry out His instructions and orders. The Church is
His mouthpiece. And to be a prophet means to be the mouthpiece of God (Exod. 4:14-
16).

This loss of perspective which separates prophecy from evangelism, preaches

salvation without proclaiming repentance and justice, reduces the currents some of
which are ghastly in their cruelty and injustice. Some Church leaders, for example, are
enthusiastic to perform marriages for homosexuals, but too timid to oppose the annual
murder of sixty million babies through abortion. Today we seek the patronage of the
Pharaoh in order to preach to the enslaved people. We do not dare to witness to
pharaoh himself.

But the tragedy is that when we cease to be the voice for justice, we also become
ineffective as channels of salvation: When we are not breaking the yoke of
oppression, we have no 'good news for the poor' either. The poor masses consider us
irrelevant and our critics legitimately dismiss us as giving 'opium', and not spreading
the Good News.

Martin Luther's preaching on justification by faith alone was a judgement of an

Establishment that had become corrupt. That is why it required enormous power, and
that is why it resulted in such great reform and many conversions. Paul's preaching of
Jesus and His cross, as we saw in Chapter 2, was the judgment of Jewish and Roman
exploitative Establishments. That is why he was seen as an opponent of the Jewish
law, of the enslaving temple worship and traditions. No wonder Paul needed power
from above for such preaching. Such witness has to be stamped with one's blood. It
has to be a cross-bearing witness. The tragedy of the contemporary Church is that
those Christians who rightly stress the necessity of the work of the Holy Spirit in our
lives, are often mistaken about the purpose of God's gift of the Holy Spirit to the
Church. They mistake signs to be the reality itself. They seem to think that the Holy
Spirit is given primarily to empower us to do the 'miracles' whereas God said:

―I will put my Spirit on him [my servant]

and he will bring justice to the nations...
A bruised reed he will not break, and a
smouldering wick he will not snuff out.
In faithfulness he will bring forth justice;
he will not falter or be discouraged till he
establishes justice on earth ...‖(Isa. 42:1-4)
It is a great folly to dismiss this as 'the Old Covenant'. The Lord Jesus Himself said:

―The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me...to proclaim
freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the
oppressed‖ (Luke 4:18).

Miracles are 'signs' of the Kingdom, Justice and righteousness are its contents (see Ps.
45:6-7).

The Power for Cross-Bearing

Jesus, who commissioned His disciples to go out as His witnesses, called them to a
life of cross-bearing. The disciples were willing to drink the cup, the passion and
humiliation of the cross, which Jesus drank (Matt.20:22), but did not have the power
to do so. Jesus said that their spirits were willing but the flesh was weak (Matt.26:41).

Jerusalem had crucified Jesus because He claimed to be her legitimate King. For one
to reassert in Jerusalem, within two months of Christ's murder that Christ was indeed
the King, was to woo death. How could the disciples who had earlier fled from
persecution, bear witness to Jesus's Kingship without receiving strength which came
from beyond themselves? For such a witness, they needed more than the power of
oratory, the power of tongues, and the power to perform miracles. The disciples were
able to perform miracles long before they were baptised with the Holy Spirit on the
day of Pentecost, but they were too weak to face persecution (Matt.10:1; Luke10:17).
What they needed was the courage to confront their corrupt and cruel society with its
sin, call it to repentance and take the consequences of such a confrontation, i.e.
persecution.

This was precisely the transformation which the baptism of the Holy Spirit brought
about in the disciples. When the Jewish leaders who had killed Jesus and arrested the
apostles came face to face with the courage of 'unschooled, ordinary men' like Peter
and John, 'they were astonished' (Acts 4:13). The leaders imprisoned, threatened and
flogged the apostles, warning them not to speak in the name of Jesus. But the
disciples had the strength to disregard the warnings, rejoice in persecution and
deliberately choose to disobey the state. That is evangelism.

This is also civil disobedience. By disobeying the state, the disciples affirmed that
there was a law and a law-giver higher than the state. They affirmed that the present
leadership was unjust, immoral and unworthy of obedience. By their disobedience,
they proclaimed they had a new king; that they were subjects of the Government of
God. Their willingness to suffer and die was a testimony to their certain knowledge
and faith in the resurrection. Such a cross-bearing affirmation of the Sovereignty of
God is political freedom, just as its opposite, Fascism, is “an active and violent
resistance to Transcendence” (Earnest Holte).

Cross-bearing is the original version of civil disobedience. It is a Christian's

submission to the higher law of God, a deliberate rejection of the immoral laws of the
state and a joyful acceptance of the consequences of the stand.
Cross-bearing is not easy, and that is why before his arrest in Gethsemane Jesus asked
his disciples to 'Watch and pray, so that you will not fall into temptation' (Act. 26:41).
One needs power for cross-bearing witness. That is why Paul prayed for the
Colossians that they might be 'strengthened with all power . . . may have great
endurance and patience . . . (Col. 1:11). Paul asked Timothy to 'be strong in the grace
that is in Christ Jesus . . . endure hardship with us like a good soldier of Jesus Christ'
(2 Tim.2:1-3).

Thus the power for prophetic evangelism is the power to bear courageous witness to
the truth and accept persecution from those who are committed to suppress the truth
with unrighteousness.

Willingly to choose suffering and self-sacrifice for the sake of righteousness is to

walk the way of the cross. It is to engage in a moral and spiritual conflict with the
powers and principalities. You stand for truth: they stand for oppression. They stand
with the sword. You stand with the cross, the symbol of self-sacrifice. Cross-bearing
means power because choosing suffering presupposes fearlessness. The Kingdom of
Satan is the reign of terror (Heb. 2:14-15). Social evils in the Kingdom of Satan
continue to exist because people are too afraid to resist them at personal cost. If we
oppose the corruption of powers and principalities, we are threatened, harassed,
persecuted or ultimately killed. That is how oppressive societies perpetuate their
injustice. The way of the cross doesnotmean accepting injustices. It means refusing to
accept what is unjust and taking the consequences of that stand, even if it results in
death.

While glancing through the Gospels one sees that Jesus emphatically taught His
followers not to fear those who could kill the body. This fearless willingness to suffer
is a prerequisite to prophetic evangelism. God said to Jeremiah,

―Stand up and say to them whatever I command you. Do not be terrified by them,
or I will terrify you before them. Today I made you a fortified city ... to stand
against the whole land against the kings of Judah, its officials, its priests and the
people of the land. They will fight against you but will not overcome you‖ (Jer.
1:17-19).

―Let goods and kindred go

This mortal life also
The body they may kill
God's truth abideth still
His kingdom is for ever.‖

That was the Christ-like attitude of Martin Luther which made the Protestant
reformation possible. In our day Lech Walesa, the Nobel Peace Prize winning labour
leader of Poland, a Catholic, whose daring initiative led to the dismantling of the
oppressive Communist empire in Eastern Europe, exhibited similar power:

―Never shall we make alliance with kings,

Never shall we bow our necks to might;
It is from Christ we take our order,
Each of us Mary's knight!
We shall not kneel before the power of authority...
Hunger nor misfortune shall break us.
Nor the world's flattery shall lead us astray:
For we are all the recruits of Christ,
Each of us in His pay!‖*
{Insertion from text: These are the first and last stanzas of ‗The Confederate Son‘,
quoted from Maria Janion‘s article ‗Lech Walesa: A Worker in ‗The Other Side,‘ New
Delhi, Nov. 1983}

Fruit of the Spirit: Love

A fearless prophet, defying the state, preaching both judgment and repentance and
facing persecution, creates the image of a rough and rugged man. But Jesus had asked
Peter to take loving care of His tender lambs, to feed and protect them (John 21:15-
17). The Kingdom of God was for the meek and the lowly (Matt. 5:3-5).

God in His Kingdom has:

―...scattered those who are proud in their inmost thoughts

but has lifted up the humble.
He has brought down rulers from their thrones...
He has filled the hungry with good things
but has sent the rich away empty‖ (Luke 1:51-3).

The disciples, like normal human beings, were looking for themselves in the Kingdom
of God (Matt.18:1-6; 20:20-3). Their favourite topic of debate was, `Who is the
greatest among us?' But the power of the Holy Spirit was not for one's self-
glorification; it was for serving others, especially the powerless.

Jesus continuously taught His disciples that to be great they had to humble themselves
and become servants. He tried to teach them that the kingdom of Satan was for the
big, but the kingdom of God was for the little children, the nobodies. This verbal
teaching was not enough. Jesus also gave them object lessons by blessing the
children, by becoming a servant Himself and washing their feet. But teaching and
examples were not enough. They needed power to become servants. They needed the
power to see that the great dreams of the restoration of Israel had meaning only if the
powerless people had a place in those dreams.

It takes great vision and power to become a servant in a selfish, exploitative society.
That is what the baptism of the Holy Spirit achieved in the disciples. Their eyes were
opened to see the needs around them and to respond to those human needs with
tenderness and the Holy Spirit's resourcefulness. Earlier they had seen the lame man
at the beautiful gate as a beggar. Now they saw him with eyes of compassion, as a
human being in need of something more than money. Their love for him was the fruit
of the Holy Spirit in them (Gal. 5:22). Christlike compassion and character are what
the HolySpirit produces in those who seek Him. This is the primary work of the Holy
Spirit in all believers. By the Spirit's power we first become witnesses, then we are
able to give credible witness.
The Holy Spirit not only gave the apostles the power to have compassion for the
insignificant crippled beggar, He also empowered them to heal the beggar, to meet his
need.

We cannot belittle the supernatural gifts of healing, casting out demons and
performing miracles. I have seen these miracles take place in answer to my own
prayers, as well as those of others who have the gift of healing. But we must
remember that the power of performing miracles was not a result of the baptism of the
Holy Spirit. The apostles and the seventy disciples were given that gift much before
their experience of Pentecost. What the baptism of the Holy Spirit did for them was to
make them servants. Earlier the “seventy” had exulted in their powerto perform
miracles (Luke 10:17-20). Now they exalted Christ, as His servants. They not only
healed the sick and cast out demons, they also looked after the widows, the orphans,
the poor and the drought-stricken (Acts 6:1-4:32-35; 2 Cor. 8, 9 etc.).

A prophetic judgment against oppression, cruelty and exploitation in our society can
have no meaning if it is not backed by our own life of service and the care of the
powerless lambs. But our service also has little effectiveness if it is not seen against
the background of our overall Christlike compassion for man.

We have seen in Chapter 1 that Christ's compassion was not some sentimental pity or
charity. It grew out of a prophetic insight into the social evils of His day. Jesus saw
the crowds as harassed and helpless sheep, whose shepherds had turned into wolves.
He was moved enough to cry, outraged enough to condemn and concerned enough to
identify Himself with them so fully as to lay down His life for them. That is
compassionate service. Naturally it calls for supernatural power - the power to deny
ourselves, take up our cross and follow the Good Shepherd.

There is no dearth of Christian service today. But because much of it is service

without prophetic compassion, it is powerless to bring about a radical change in
individuals and society. To be a Good Samaritan has eternal value in itself, but that is
not the highest ideal of Christian service. It is only the beginning. A concern for the
wounded and robbed man must lead us on to a prophetic judgment of the systems that
violate the rights, dignity and values of man made in God's image.

Our service will have a cutting edge when it is seen against the background of our
overall concern for man. A prophetic judgment of all that dehumanises man in our
society gives meaning and power to our service towards those wounded and crushed
by the same society. But in order to be credible, our prophetic words must be backed
by service, by a practical affirmation of the value of man. A prophet may stand
outside society, but a servant gets inside and dirties his hands. For a prophet to have
his message heard, he has to become a prophet-servant.

Such service which grows out of a prophetic compassion brings one power because it
makes one a good shepherd. Jesus had compassion for the crowds partly because the
Jewish political, economic, civic and religious leaders, who should have been
shepherds to the people, had instead become wolves (Matt.9.36). The crowds sought
Jesus because they were looking for a shepherd, a new leader. Jesus, therefore, sent
His disciples to preach, to serve and become shepherds to those lost sheep (Matt.
10:6-8,16). Jesus' mission was to become the shepherd, to take over leadership from
the wolves.

The role of a shepherd, community leader or reformer, gives social power. Jesus used
that power as a deterrent against His arrest (Luke 20:19). He had been to the temple
many times and was no doubt indignant at its corruption. But He did not challenge it
until He had a crowd behind Him, shouting His praises. The High priests and soldiers
were afraid to arrest Him for they feared the crowds would take to rioting. John the
Baptist had remained a prophet, so it was relatively easy to arrest and kill him. But
Jesus had gone on to become a shepherd by being a servant, and His flock was a
powerful deterrent against His arrest.

It was the same with the sixteenth-century reformers. Martin Luther would have been
arrested and killed as soon as the Reformation began, had his service not built up a
powerful popular opinion in his favour. When Miltitz, a Saxon nobleman and
chamberlain in the papal court, was sent by the Pope to secure the support of
Frederick the Wise (the Duke of Saxony) against Luther, he realised as he travelled
through Germany that public opinion was so strongly in favour of Luther that even if
he had an army at his command, he could not take Luther to Rome. The people did
not stand up for Luther (or Jesus) just because he was a saint, a great preacher or a
theologian, but because they could see that Luther's stand against the Roman
exploitation was in their own interest.

Service is the legitimate means of acquiring the power to lead. Service done with
prophetic compassion makes one a shepherd, the de facto leader of the community.

Jesus asked Peter to take care of His sheep. The Holy Spirit empowered him for that
service. Paul made it clear in 1 Corinthians 12 that the power and gifts of the Holy
Spirit are for service to others. 'There are different kinds of service,' he said, 'but the
same Lord ... to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common
good' (vv.5-7). That is why love - the fruit of the Spirit - is the greatest power we
must seek (1 Cor.13).

Prayer: The Source of Power

The Holy Spirit empowers us for prophetic, compassionate evangelism in response to

prayer. The power comes from prayer, because prayer puts us in touch with God.

In the Garden of Gethsemane, just before His arrest, Jesus asked His disciples to pray
so that they might have the power to withstand opposition. They did not pray;
therefore, they fled before the threat of persecution. Before His ascension, Jesus asked
them again to pray; they did, and were filled with the Holy Spirit and with power to
serve, to suffer and to turn the world upside-down (reform) with their prophetic
preaching.

A theology of power has to begin with God, Who is all powerful. When Zerubbabel,
Joshua the High priest, Ezra and Nehemiah faced the task of restoration and
rebuilding, they were told by God “Not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit” the
great mountain shall be removed (Zech.4:6). Nehemiah had to build with a sword in
his hand, but the Bible makes it clear that his faith rested not in the power of the
sword, but in God. If there was ever a man of prayer, he was one. His power for great
reforms came from prayer.

Dependence on God and the use of service, suffering, the sword or wise strategies are
not mutually exclusive. It is like taking medicine and praying for healing.

Of course, some people do not even take medicines because they find it inconsistent
with faith. My question to them is, “Why do you pick up a spanner or a screwdriver to
repair your bicycle when it goes wrong? Don't you believe that God can fix it? Why
don't you just pray?” Their reply inevitably is, “Because a bicycle is a machine.” But
the body is also a machine, as is the universe. Just as a man can work on a bicycle, so
can man work on the human body and in the physical universe. Because man is made
in God's image, his actions have significance. We must not belittle man's God-given
abilities and significance. But we must also remember that just as a machine is open
to human intervention, so it is open to divine intervention. God can and does work in
the universe, in a human body and in a machine like a bicycle. Four times I have seen
a scooter and a car run on prayer! Because the universe is open to God's intervention,
prayer has meaning and significance. Both prayer and wise strategies are necessary
for world-transforming witness. Man forgets prayer only at his own peril.

One night the chief of village Karri came to our community to ask if any of us knew
sorcery. A Brahmin woman, Ramkali, had been bitten by a snake. The sorcerers had
been called and they were casting spells when she became unconscious. The
Government doctor, who was there, gave her intravenous glucose, because he didn't
have anti-venom. Her condition became more critical. Now as she was dying, her
friends were running around looking for witch doctors.

I said to the chief, 'We don't know sorcery, but we can pray.' He said, 'please come
and at least pray.' Three of us Christians and one Muslim seeker went to pray. We
knelt around Ramkali's bed. Over fifty people, including the doctor, watched us as we
prayed for this virtually dead woman. In less than ten minutes, as we opened our eyes,
she did too! On the third day she walked to our home three miles away to thank us
and the living God Who answers prayers.

I know that prayer is a Christian's source of power, because I have seen the power of
prayer in our struggle with the Government, police, politicians, power structures of
villages, 'goondas' and bandits. For months the highest police officer of Chatarpur had
been threatening to kill me. For at least one year a politician of the ruling party and
another of the Communist party schemed ways to murder me. But through the power
of prayer, we were able to withstand all this. We have the power of prayer in bringing
hardened people to repentance and moving believers to share their wealth with the
needy at great personal cost.

I believe in human planning, strategy and action because man is significant. He

affects not only machines but society and history as well. But I also believe in prayer
because God is Almighty. He acts in the mechanical universe, as well as in the hearts
of believers and unbelievers. I believe in prayer because God is the author and
finisher of history; therefore, prayer for reformation, prayer for change in society has
meaning. Some of the greatest reforms in Biblical history came when men like Daniel
(Dan.9) and Nehemiah (Neh.1) prayed.
Prayer not only has meaning but it is the only solution when we are faced with
natural, social or spiritual problems which are beyond human wisdom and strength,
because prayer releases the power of God.

It is necessary that we stand in the supernatural power of the Holy Spirit, because the
battle between good and evil ultimately is supernatural. Modern man ignores the
diabolic supernatural dimensions of evil; therefore, he is unable to understand or to
deal with the social dimensions of evil.

Praying is trusting God. The Bible says that faith is what ultimately overcomes the
world (1 John 5:5). Faith is power because it produces hope and generates action in a
stagnant society. Faith is power because it produces patience and perseverance. Faith
is power because it gives staying ability in the midst of opposition - the power to
stand, to serve, to fight, to suffer, to die and to overcome. Most supremely, trusting or
praying releases power because our dependence on God moves Him to act.
5

THE CHURCH AND SOCIAL REFORM:

A POWER STRUCTURE FOR THE POOR

Social evils usually are unjust social relationships and their chronic consequences.
The Church was meant to be a structure to ensure just relationships; therefore, by its
very nature it was intended to be the answer to social evils, a force for social reform, a
threat to the unjust oppression.

Poverty, when it is chronic, for example, can also be a product of oppressive,

exploitative economic relations. The Proverbs say, `A poor man's field may produce
abundant food, but injustice sweeps it away' (13.23). In this chapter we shall see that
in the Bible the Church is the antidote to poverty, because it was meant to be a
community bound by self-sacrificing love.

In Chapter 2 we saw that slavery, i.e. an oppressive, exploitative economic

relationship, is justified and perpetuated by false beliefs; therefore, proclamation of
truth is the basic tool of reform. Poverty, however, has not only a theological
dimension to it but a social dimension also. That is the focus of our concern in this
chapter.

Evangelism which does not take church planting seriously usually springs from a
deficient theology which does not take the social dimensions of sin and salvation
seriously. Evangelism without church planting and evangelism without a
compassionate concern for society are two sides of the same coin. They are rooted in
the lack of a clear understanding of the mission of our Lord.

The Mission of Christ and the Necessity of the Church

We do not need to take a comprehensive look at the mission of our Lord to understand
why it was necessary for Jesus to create the Church. We can be selective and refer to
only three examples of how Jesus perceived Himself, the people and His Church to
understand the role of the Church.

1. Jesus' Perception of Himself

Jesus proved his Messiahship by pointing out His mission to the weak and the poor.
When John the Baptist sent his disciples to find out whether Jesus was indeed the
Christ, Jesus responded by exhibiting His compassion for the needy and saying, `Go
back and report to John what you have seen and heard: The blind receive sight, the
lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised and
the good news is preached to the poor.' (Luke 7:22).

According to Luke, when Jesus first claimed to be the Messiah He supported this
claim from Isaiah 61:1-2:
―The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
because he has anointed me to preach
good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom
for the prisoners
and recovery of sight for the blind,
to release the oppressed,
to proclaim the year of the Lord's favour‖ (Luke 4:18-19).

2. Jesus's Perception of People

Jesus did not see people merely as souls to be saved from hell. He saw them as sheep
without a shepherd, `harassed and helpless' (Matt. 9:36); sheep in need of deliverance
from the wolves (Matt. 10:16); as oppressed men `weary and burdened' who needed
rest -shalom (Matt. 11:28). Jesus's claim to kingship rested on the fact that He was
the `ruler who [would] be the shepherd of... Israel' (Matt. 2:6).

3. Jesus‘s Perception of the Church

Jesus said that He was sent 'to the lost sheep of Israel' (Matt. 15:24) to gather them
into the fold, like the good shepherd who leaves the ninety-nine and goes after the one
that is lost, to bring it in (Matt. 18:12-14). He sent out His disciples to do the same, to
work as under-shepherds, to gather the harassed sheep into an `ecclesia', the Church
`As the Father has sent me,' said Jesus `I am sending you' (John 20:21). Why is He
sending them? To take care of the sheep, who are at present at the mercy of wolves.
'Feed my lambs... 'He gently pleaded with Simon Peter 'Take care of my sheep... Feed
my sheep' (John 21:15-17).

The Church as a Power Structure

Many Christians conceive of the Church as merely a harmless, worshipping,

witnessing and serving community. If it were so, it would hardly invite the
persecution it did, nor would it have needed the supernatural Power which we
discussed in the previous chapter. When Jesus used the word 'ecclesia' to describe the
community He was intending to create, He obviously had an image of the Church
which is radically different from the modern connotations created by the word
`Church'. William Barclay, in his study New Testament Words, describes what the
word 'ecclesia' meant. That was the picture which Jesus's use of the word 'church'
would have conjured up in the minds of His audience. Barclay says:

“The ecclesia was the convened assembly of the people (in Greek City States). It
consisted of all the citizens of the city who had not lost their civic rights. Apart
from the fact that its decisions must conform to the laws of the State, its powers
were to all intents and purposes unlimited. It elected and dismissed magistrates
and directed the policy of the city. It declared wars, made peace, contracted
treaties and arranged alliances. It elected generals and other military officers. It
assigned troops to different campaigns and dispatched them from the city. It was
ultimately responsible for the conduct of all military operations. It raised and
allocated funds. Two things are interesting to note: first, all its meetings began
with prayer and a sacrifice. Second, it was a true democracy. Its two great
watchwords were 'equality' (isonomia) and 'freedom' (eleutheria). It was an
assembly where everyone had an equal right and an equal duty to take part.”
{Insertion from text: William Barclay, New Testament Words, SCM Press, 1964,
pp.68-9}

Thus, according to Barclay, ecclesia referred to a power structure.

Did the word ecclesia have similar connotations in Jesus's mind, as described by
William Barclay? Yes, in the very first usage of the word ecclesia, Jesus envisaged a
community in conflict. He said to Simon, 'And I tell you that you are Peter, and on
this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it' (Matt.
16:18).

In this first statement about the Church, we are told that the Church was going to be a
social structure in conflict with the forces of death. Why? Because in an oppressive
society if a group stands up to take care of the lambs, it automatically stands up
against the wolves. The wolves are bound to fight the good shepherd. They have to do
their best to destroy the ecclesia, if the ecclesia dares to protect the sheep. The Church
was not meant to be an army that attacks evil, oppressive social structures, but a
community that cares for the harassed and helpless sheep. But, unlike many
Christians, Christ had no romantic vision of peaceful service. He knew that one
cannot serve the sheep realistically without infuriating the vested interests—the
wolves. Therefore, because conflict was inevitable, the Church had to be a powerful
structure, a community that could withstand the very forces of Hades itself. It had to
be a community which had the power to take up its cross, to follow its master.

The Church as the Antidote to Social Evils

Perhaps the themes of this chapter are best summed up in Ezekiel 34 which deals with
the following facts:

(a) Poverty: A Product of Unjust Relationships

Poverty in Judah at the time of this writing was a problem of unjust economic
relationships. Ezekiel said:

―The Lord spoke to me. Mortal man, denounce the rulers of Israel. Prophesy to
them, and tell them what I, the Sovereign Lord, say to them: You are doomed, you
shepherds of Israel! You take care of yourselves, but never tend the sheep. You
drink the milk, wear clothes made from the wool, and kill and eat the finest sheep.
But you never tend the sheep. You have not taken care of the weak ones, healed
the ones that are sick, bandaged the ones that are hurt, brought back the ones that
wandered off, or looked for the ones that were lost. Instead, you treated them
cruelly…‖

―Now then, my flock, I, the Sovereign Lord, tell you that I will judge each of you
and separate the good from the bad, the sheep from the goats. Some of you are not
satisfied with eating the best grass; you even trample down what you don't eat!
You drink the clear water and muddy what you don't drink! My other sheep have
to eat the grass you trample down and drink the water you muddy. So now, I, the
Sovereign Lord, tell you that I will judge between you strong sheep andthe weak
sheep. You pushed the sick ones aside and butted them away from the flock...‖
(34:1- 4;17-20).

(b) Ingathering of Sheep: The Answer To Poverty

The shepherdhood of the Messiah was seen in His care for the weak and the hungry
sheep.

―I, the Sovereign Lord, tell you that I myself will look for my sheep and take care
of them in the same way as a shepherd takes care of his sheep that were scattered
and are brought together again. I will bring them back from all the places where
they were scattered...

―I myself will be the shepherd of my sheep, and I will find them a place to rest‖
(Ezek. 34 :11-15).

(c) The Kingship of Christ as Shepherdhood

One of the Messiah's primary answer to socio-economic problems would be in

gathering the harassed sheep into His flock.

―I, the Sovereign Lord have spoken, I will look for those that are lost, bring back
those that wander off, bandage those that are hurt, and heal those that are sick;
but those that are fat and strong I will destroy, because I am a shepherd who does
what is right... I will give them a king like my servant David to be their one
shepherd, and he will take care of them. I, the Lord, will be their God, and a king
my servant David will be their ruler...

―I will give them fertile fields and put an end to hunger in the land. The other
nations will not sneer at them any more. Everyone will know that I protect Israel
and that they are my people. . . . You, my sheep, my flock that I feed, are my
people, and I am your God (Ezek. 34:15-23, 29-31).

Contemporary Image of the Church

Looking at much of the contemporary Church in India, one can be justified in

dismissing the view that the Church is the antidote to poverty. Shamefully, we must
confess that very often the institutional Church has been the cause or means of
perpetuating injustice and poverty. One ecumenical theologian, who is on the pay-roll
of a church-related institution and is concerned about poverty, argued in a conference
that the greatest sacrifice the Church can make for the poor in the twentieth century is
to sacrifice itself, i.e., get out of existence! We have no quarrel with such theologians
because they are talking about the existing image and reality of a part of the Church.
In fact, we are ashamed that ecumenical theologians have had the courage to attack
the evils within the Church, whereas evangelicals have sometimes been content either
to woo even the corrupt Church leaders or just separate themselves from the wider
Church.
The problem with these theologians begins when they seem to dismiss the very
concept of Church as irrelevant to the struggle against injustice and the struggle for
the weak. At that point it seems that the economists understand the need for human
organisation to combat poverty better than the theologians. For example, C. T.
Kurien, a leftist economist, in his book, Poverty and Development, say that
development in India is possible only through conscious and deliberate mass
movement. He said,

“a mass movement can be effected only through organising for action and through
various forms of new institutions. . . .Such institutions also serve as new centres of
power however limited their density may be to begin with. What is significant his
that they form a new basis of power - the power of an informed and organised
people as contrasted with property power, for instance. The building up of such a
new power base is necessary to bring about a separation between property power
and political power which so often tend to merge.”* {Insertion from text: C.T.
Kurien, Poverty and Development, CLS, Madras, 1974, p. 24}

Many people fail to see the relevance of the Church to the question of social evils
such as chronic poverty, because progress is judged in terms of quantity of
production. Therefore, the problem of poverty is seen as a problem of technology -
lack of technical know-how, tools and material resources.

Knowledge, tools and resources are indeed important, but their lack is not the basic
problem, certainly not in rural India. A Western agriculturist, who worked for years in
India trying to fight poverty at the grass-roots level with appropriate technology,
ultimately gave up in despair. He said to me, `If the problems were technological, we
could have solved them, because we have all the technical answers. But the problem
is different. My training and background do not enable me even to understand the
problem of poverty in India.'

One of the basic causes of poverty is the concentration of political power in the hands
of those who are also economically and socially powerful. Hinduism gives religious
sanction to this concentration of power which his almost consistently used for
oppression. The top leadership of the nation also uses (and thereby reinforces) the
hold of the existing power structures for gathering votes. Much of the Church
development also works to strengthen the existing leadership, but hardly anyone
consciously stands up to empower the oppressed . . . though that is precisely what
Jesus did.

From the Acts of the Apostles, we see that Jerusalem, like any other pilgrim centre,
attracted the poor, orphans, widows, beggars, priests and others. These poor were
attracted to the Church, because the Church was a centre of power which cared for the
weak, in contrast to the Jewish temple. Once they came into the Church, they were no
longer poor because the believers shared their wealth with each other very liberally.
`There were no needy persons among them, `the New Testament says. `For from time
to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales
and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need' (4:34-
5).
This care for the powerless did not come about only after Pentecost. It was part of the
ministry of Christ's ecclesia during His own life. It was not just the twelve apostles
whose needs were met by the common purse of Christ's community. When blind
beggars, such as the one at Jericho, received their sight, the Gospels say that `he
received sight and followed Jesus' (Luke 18:35-42), i.e. the beggar no longer begged,
but lived as a part of the community of disciples.

When Jesus called disciples to follow Him, He offered to look after their material
needs, too. They did not need to go back to their jobs such as fishing. Even the rich
young ruler was asked to give away all his wealth to the poor and follow Jesus (Luke
18:22), meaning that for his needs he must trust Jesus and his community, not his own
material resources. The incident at the Lord's Supper makes it clear that care for the
poor was a routine function of Christ's community. When Jesus told Judas, `What you
are about to do, do quickly,' His disciples thought that, `Since Judas has charge of the
money. . . Jesus was telling him. . . to give something to the poor' (John 13:27-9).
Earlier, when Mary anointed Jesus's feet with expensive perfume, Judas asked, `Why
wasn't this perfume sold and the money given to the poor?' (John 12:5).

This care of the poor continued after Christ‟s ascension. Paul says that the Church
leadership had specifically asked him to take care of the poor, which he was doing
anyway (Gal. 2:10). The Church was a power structure which was intended to care for
the powerless. Jesus compared the Church to a small seed which grows into a mighty
tree, `so that the birds of the air come and perch in its branches' (Matt. 13:32).

In contrast to the Jewish Establishment where political and economical power had
become concentrated in the same hands, the New Testament Church was a
counterbalancing centre of power. C. T. Kurien said that India needed `a new
basis of power - the power of an informed and organised people as contrasted
with property power.'* To build up an ecclesia in poor societies, such as an Indian
village where the present social organisation (caste) favours the powerful, is to
build up a new power base which automatically threatens the concentration of
political and economic power. However, it is important for us not to be carried
away by the Marxist presuppositions of writers such as Mr. Kurien. The Church of
Jesus Christ must welcome the rich as much as the poor. Before the wealth can be
distributed, it has to be created. Those who create wealth and share it with others
will have their reward in heaven (Matt. 19:21). {Insertion from text: C.T. Kurien,
Poverty and Development, CLS, Madras, 1974, p. 24}

The evangelists who go out preaching the good news, in obedience to their Lord, are
often unaware of the social implications of conversion and Church planting. Their
opponents, however, understand much better the threat that the Church represents.
That is why they oppose evangelism and Church planting. Today in India, the most
serious opposition to evangelism, conversion and church planting comes from those
Hindu organisations such as the RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh) and Vishwa
Hindu Parishad, which are committed to re-establishing political control of the nation
in the hands of the high-caste Hindus - those who already have the economic and
social power. These organisationsunderstand the political threat a growing Church
represents. The RSS is self-consciously built on the teachings of the German thinkers
who created Nazism. These thinkers understood well the threat Christianity represents
to every ideology of domination of some by the others. For example, Freidric
Nietzche, one of the most influential German thinkers wrote:

“Christianity sprang from Jewish roots and comprehensible only as a growth on this
soil, represents the counter movement to any morality of breeding, of race, of
privilege: it is the anti-Aryan religion par excellence.”

To appreciate the breadth of Jesus‟ vision of ecclesia it will be helpful to look afresh
at His statement in Matthew 16:18.

―I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church and the
gates of Hades will not overcome it.‖

Church : A Community in Conflict with Forces of Death

We have already noticed the fact that Jesus implied in this statement that the Church
will be a community in conflict with the forces of death because it will be a channel
of life to the little lambs, which are harassed and helpless without a shepherd.

Church : A Community of Servants, not a Collection of Heroes.

Peter was one of those disciples who were dreaming of sitting next to Jesus at His left
or right hand when He came to power. They dreamt of the day when the present
political institution of darkness, under the authority of Satan, will be overthrown and
the Kingship of Christ will be established. It was a great revolution for which they
were planning to fight.

Therefore, when a few mothers brought their little children to Jesus so that he might
bless them, the disciples got upset. `Why do you make our Master weary,' they
probably said, `by these petty petitions of yours? Don't you see the great mission for
which we need to conserve our energies?' Jesus rebuked the disciples. “Let the little
children come to me,” He said, “for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these”
(Matt. 19:14).

The great people are already having good times in the kingdom of Satan. They don't
need the Kingdom of God. If the Kingdom of God means nothing for these little ones,
it means nothing at all.

After Peter‟s confession of Jesus as Messiah in Matthew 16:16, Jesus began to teach
His disciples `that He must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the
elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that He must be killed. . . ' (Matt.
16:21).

At this, Peter was upset and began to rebuke Jesus. Peter may have said `what do you
mean, you are going to die? Are we fools that we have left our wives and work to
follow you and you want to end up on a cross? Our families have allowed us to follow
you because one day they expect to see us on the throne with you. You can't desert us
like that.'

Jesus responded to Peter with a severe rebuke: `Get behind me, Satan!' (v.23).
Just because Peter acknowledged Jesus as King he did not qualify to become a hero in
Christ's ecclesia. He was being called to become a servant, a shepherd to the helpless
sheep and to lay down his life for the lambs.

Jesus said, `If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his
cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses
his life for me will find it' (vv.24-5).

Jesus was saying that the structure which can withstand the force of death will not be
a collection of heroes but a community of love, an ecclesia - where leaders are willing
to lay down their lives for one another. That was Christ's vision of the Church.

The writers of the New Testament devote much space in their epistles, in exhorting us
to be a church, a body, a temple in which God can dwell through His Spirit because
there is a context of love and holiness which results in our mutual submission to one
another.

Church: A Community Built on a Victorious Faith

`Upon this rock,' said Jesus, `I will build my church. . . I will give you the keys of the
kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and what
ever you loose on earth, will be loosed in heaven' (Matt. 16:18-19).

Chairman Mao taught that political power comes from the barrel of a gun. Jesus said
to Peter that his knowledge of the truth that Jesus is `Christ, the Son of the living God'
(Matt. 16:16), and faith in this truth are together the rock upon which the victorious
ecclesia would be built.

While the angel was describing the brutal power of the kingdom of Satan to Daniel,
he conceded that strength of arm will not be able to withstand the power of
wickedness. `But the people that do know their God', said the angel, `shall be strong
and do exploits (Dan. 11:32 AV) or, as the New International Version puts it, `the
people who know their God will firmly resist him [the evil ruler]‟.

The apostle John says, `This is the victory that has overcome the world, even our
faith. Who is it that overcomes the world? Only he who believes that Jesus is the Son
of God' (1 John 5:4-5).

The church is a community that cares for the weak, but it is built on a victorious faith
in a supernatural universe. The battle for social reform requires a transcendental faith.

Church: A Dwelling-Place of God

Jesus said, `I will build my church'. We have seen that the Bible teaches that the root
cause of social evils is that the world has become Satan's kingdom. In contrast, Jesus
is seeking to establish the Church as God's dwelling-place in the midst of the kingdom
of Satan. The Church is God's new community in a fallen world, a channel of life and
liberty. It is described as God's `temple', `household', `bride' or „the body‟, of which
Christ is the head. It is created to be the showpiece of God's work of redemption
through which the manifold wisdom of God could be exhibited to the rulers and
authorities in the supernatural dimensions of the universe (Eph. 3:10)

Church: An Inseparable Part of the Good News

Upon this victorious faith . . . `I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not
overcome it' means that the creation of the Church is an intrinsic part of the hope, the
Good News that Jesus offers. The Good News is a message of individual forgiveness
for sin, freedom from captivity of enslaving beliefs - and it is also the creation of a
new community, built on truth, which cares for others with self-sacrificing love - a
community which overcomes sinful social barriers that alienate men such as Jews v.
Gentiles, masters v. slaves, men v. women.

St. Paul says that the Church is:

―the mystery of Christ, which was not made known to men in other generations as
it has now been revealed by the Spirit to God's holy apostles and prophets. This
mystery is that through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel,
members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ
Jesus‖ (Eph. 3:4-6).

St. Paul was excited about the Church, `the great mystery of God', because the Church
is the `unsearchable riches of Christ... in God'.

The Church can become a matter of excitement in a country like India if it is seen to
be uniting `untouchables' and the `high caste' into one body. The same applies to other
countries where human beings are sharply divided according to race, colour,
economic status, sex, etc. These alienations are the results of sin, features of the
kingdom of Satan. Salvation includes becoming one body by overcoming the sin that
separates.

An Unfinished Story

In 1980, as a result of the work of ACRA, three small worshipping congregations had
sprung up, consisting exclusively of non-Christians who had put their trust in Christ.
In one village five families, led by my father, used to meet for worship. `D' was one
of them - a semi-literate man converted from an untouchable background. Some years
ago, when he was a child, his family land had been forcibly taken by a high-caste
Hindu. In 1974, while `D' was still a Hindu, he started a court case against the man
who had grabbed his land. The case did not go far because no one in the village was
willing to come forward as a witness in support of `D'. This was because twenty-five
families had grabbed the little plots that had been given to over 100 families. The
twenty-five families were more powerful than the 100 families. Therefore, the poor
could not even give witness for one another.

But the Church was a new factor in that oppressive situation. `D' shared his problem
with other Christians and they prayed about it. They felt that the case should be
reopened. After some time the Church discovered that legally the land still belonged
to `D'; he just needed the courage to cultivate it. The prayer and moral support of the
little church gave him the courage to venture out and repossess his land. Another
believer, `S', from the same village offered to plough the land for `D' with our tractor.
The high-caste man's family stood by with their axes, abusing us and threatening to
murder `S'. However, because they feared that the other Church members would bear
witness in court, they did not take any step. The next day they said, `You have
ploughed the land, but we will sow it.' That night `S' took the tractor and sowed the
field himself. The high-caste were infuriated.

They called a meeting of high-caste Hindus from nearly thirty villages to discuss what
to do with these Christians. The high-caste man who had grabbed `D's land argued
convincingly that it was not a matter of one man and his land, but of thousands of
acres belonging to thousands of low-castes. He said, `If one of these untouchables
succeeded in getting his land back, with the help of the Christians, you can be sure
that thousands of them will become Christians and we shall lose our land'. Those who
participated in the meeting vowed with `Ganga Jal' (water of the river Ganges) that
they would chase the Christians away from their area. They understood the threat
which the Church posed, merely by virtue of its commitment to stand with one of its
weak members.

My father was threatened, `You tell your son not to meddle in our affairs, otherwise
the consequences for you will be bad'. We prayed and felt that it was worth taking the
consequences. If we failed, we failed. But if we succeeded then it could open up
floodgates - thousands of oppressed and thousands of acres of land.

My wife and I were leaving for a lectures-cum-study trip to Europe for three months.
The night before we left, three men entered my father's farmhouse. They beat him up
as well as my step-mother and tied them up. They looted the house. Then one of them
threatened to gouge out my father's eyes with a knife. He did not do so because my
father promised to empty out his bank account the following day and give them all his
life's savings.

My father came to see us in the morning. He was worried that the men might have
come to us after leaving them. He did not say a word about the incident, but as we left
for the airport, he excused himself and went to the bank to draw out the money for
them.

My father had to flee from the village and take temporary shelter in the city. Thus he
was shattered. Two days later, two Hindu neighbours of `S' were murdered over a
land dispute. This shook `S'. Then `D' was threatened with murder. A little later my
aunt and her husband were brutally murdered in their own home in Chattarpur where
my father was staying. This last episode apparently did not have anything to do with
our struggle, but the cumulative impact of it all was that the little church was
thoroughly demoralised. Under pressure `D' agreed to `sell' the land to the high-caste
man. The high-caste man's illegal possession was legalised for a paltry sum of three
hundred rupees.

My father took a loan from ACRA and helped `D' to buy another plot of land in the
same village. It was a witness to the Church's care and commitment to the oppressed,
even though it was also an admission of powerlessness and failure. `D' is still there
cultivating. For the moment the Church stands disintegrated. It is a reminder of
Moses' abortive attempt in Egypt to free the Israelites. By himself he was too weak to
stand against the forces of Hades. He was forced to flee. But that was not the end of
the story. Moses met with God. He was transformed into a prophet and he returned
and liberated the Jews in the power of God.

The above story has not ended yet. `D' has land of his own, with an irrigation well.
The bank financed him to buy an electric pump. He worked hard, but could not feed
his family. In 1983 his total product sold for less than four thousand rupees. He repaid
two thousand to the bank for the pump, fertlisers, etc; twelve hundred were spent on
seed, repairs and fencing. That left him with eight hundred for his annual wages, i.e.,
sixty-six rupees ($6) per month for a family of six. His girls were getting free
education in a Christian boarding-school. He couldn't pay their travel from home to
school, so in disgust he withdrew them from the school. He sold firewood to make a
little extra money, but he was still forced to borrow, just to eat.

The high-caste man who grabbed `D's land and had my father nearly killed, is our
`friend' now. Recently, with `D' and `S' he spent a whole day in one of our spiritual
retreats listening to the Gospel. He knows that even though we disapprove of what he
did, we love him and are concerned about the fact that he, too, is enslaved and
exploited by the politico-economic system in which he lives. He knows that we
understand that he, too, is not making ends meet and is therefore forced to exploit his
neighbours, labourers, cattle, land, forest and his own children. He now knows that
the Christians are as much concerned for his salvation as for `D's.

The above experience contributed to my understanding that the problems of poverty,

where they were rooted not in a lack of resources and skills, but in unjust relationships
were dealt with better by God‟s NGO (Non-Governmental Organization) than by our
NGOs. The Church is a Non-Governmental Organization which God has built. While
our NGOs bring people together for brief periods, for specific programmes, God‟s
NGO brings people together in a life-long relationship. In a Church people come
together not because of economic interests but first of all as sinners, seeking to get
right with God and with one another.
6

CHRISTIAN HOPE AND SOCIAL REFORM:

A FAITH THAT OVERCOMES THE WORLD

The Christians of William Carey's generation believed that the darkness would not
overcome the light (John 1:5) and that a little leaven of the Gospel would transform
the whole dough (Matt. 13:3). Therefore, they had the motivation to resist evils in
their society. Today, however, much of the church suffers from an eschatological
paralysis: we are robbed of all meaningful motivation to challenge evils, by the
prevalent belief that darkness will continue to grow till the end of history, even
though we continue to launch new multi-million rupees projects to spread the light.

The terrible `success' of Fascism, Nazism, and Communism in our century, and two
world wars, have destroyed all secular hopes for the future of mankind as it is. Much
of the Church has read the Scriptures with that pessimistic outlook of our age and
baptised it with theological rationale. We simply mourn the coming destruction of
`The Late Great Planet Earth' instead of seeking to redeem it.

The evangelicals of the earlier era had hope for man and his planet because they
believed that far from abandoning this world, God, Who is faithful to His Word and
His creation, had made a covenant with this planet. The eternal, infinite God had
personally entered the finite, space-time world of fallen man with His salvation. The
Kingdom of God had broken into the kingdoms of this world and the gates of Hades
will not overcome it (Matt. 16:18). For them, Christian hope was not only beyond
history, but also within it.

What exactly is the Biblical view of the future? Does the Bible give a valid basis for
hope in history? What are the implications of the Christian view of the future?

A Realist's Case Against Hope

If you were to visit Bundelkhand, the area where I served, some of my critics will tell
you `if Vishal is starting a project, it is bound to fail.' There is much substance in their
assessment. My record of many failures is a very real reason for me to be pessimistic
about my future efforts. Various factors are responsible for my failures and some of
them lie outside my control. But some of the causes without question lie in my own
limitations, ignorance and sinfulness. So, when my finiteness, foolishness and
sinfulness have been conclusively established, how can I reasonably hope that my
efforts or the efforts of other finite and sinful men will create a better future in our
situation?

Some other critics will tell you that `Vishal is a good fellow, and reasonably capable,
but he has not been able to find good co-workers. Everyone he trusts lets him down;
so his rate of success is very little compared to his investment and efforts'. Correct
again! Any number of resourceful and gifted people can testify that all their efforts
have come to nothing because of the personal limitations or selfishness of their
colleagues and successors. Given the quality of the material one has to work with, can
I realistically have any hope for the future? `None - whatsoever', is the assessment of
some who have observed our efforts.

Other of critics of mine, who are more sympathetic, will say to you, `The soil here is
very bad, you can't do anything with it. Meaning: `The people you are seeking to
serve have themselves become so bad that they will use their benefactors as long as
they can and then they will abuse them. They will never support them at personal
cost. And because benefactors cannot achieve much without the active, sacrificial
support of the local people, there is no hope.' True again! Some soils produce much
fruit, others nothing. The worst soils demand the best efforts, and yet tend to give you
only disappointments. The cynics are not necessarily those who have not tried, but
often those who have tried hard and failed.

My well-wishers in the area may say to you, `Vishal has done here what no one else
has. But the powers that rule this area have a deeply entrenched vested interest in the
status quo. They are cruel and well-armed. They will not allow a centre of power to
emerge in their territory that changes the system to the advantage of "the weary and
the heavy laden." The chief minister of the state himself depends on these powers and
principalities. Therefore, in some of the villages the government itself has not been
able to open schools for forty years, as education will undermine the present power
equations. In many villages where schools have opened, the teachers survive only
because they agree not to educate the children from low-caste families. So, where the
government can do nothing, what can these unarmed social workers achieve? They
have burnt down Vishal's community once and if he becomes a threat to the existing
power structures, they will not hesitate in eliminating him'. What hope indeed can
there be for a society where wickedness rules?

Even if I were not as foolish and sinful as I am: my co-workers were better than I in
every respect; if the people I am seeking to serve were fearless, self-sacrificing
participants in my efforts, and if the power structures at local, state and national level
were supportive of actions for development - shall I succeed? Shall I then have a basis
to be an optimist? Wouldn't an earthquake, a famine, an epidemic or a flood wipe
away all that I create? Viewed from the macro-level, how can I have any confidence
that the coming decades will not produce another Hitler or Idi Amin, or an enemy
armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons? Wouldn't all our labours then be in vain?
Isn't it foolish to be optimistic about the future, given the track record of mankind in
recent and past history? Add to this list the new man-made environmental hazards
from acid rain and deforestation, destroying the lungs of the world, to
chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and the thinning of the ozone layer in the stratosphere,
making organic life on this planet vulnerable to the sun's harmful ultraviolet radiation
(the so-called `greenhouse effect'). You have an almost irrefutable case against hope.

The Christian Case for Hope

Peter had every right to be cynical that morning. He had laboured the whole night and
caught no fish. He was irritated and tired. He wanted to go home and sleep, if possible
without being seen by his family, who were waiting for the fish - so that one member
could start cooking the day's meal, while another went to sell the rest. But Jesus enters
the scene of failure and He asks Peter to lend Him the boat to serve as a pulpit for a
while. Peter consents, partly because it gives him an excuse to delay the moment of
embarrassment, of reaching his expectant family without fish.

After His sermon, Jesus asks Peter to take the boat into the deep and cast his net just
once more. Perhaps Jesus wanted to pay for His use of the boat, but He also wanted to
show that in spite of Peter's own failures, there was hope with God. `What does this
carpenter-preacher know about fishing?' would have been the natural response of
Peter's professional pride. Peter knew that the fish in this area only came to the
surface at night, they could not be caught in the daylight. But Peter says, `Master, I
have worked hard the whole night. I have failed repeatedly and therefore I have lost
hope, but I will obey you.' In that single attempt of obedience Peter caught two
boatloads of fish. Divine intervention gives success in a situation of repeated failure.

The crowd had been with Jesus for three days. Their food had gone, and they were
hungry. Jesus asks His disciples to feed the 5,000 men, plus women and children.
`How?' they wonder. A little boy then surrenders his five loaves and two fish to Jesus.
They are blessed and broken. Multitudes are satisfied because divine intervention
multiplies the meagre sacrifice that man can offer.

The master of the wedding banquet was panicking because the wine was finished -
what a disgrace it would be to send the guests away unsatisfied! Jesus's mother pleads
for His intervention. The servants are told to obey Him. They fill the jars with water.
Divine intervention transforms the water of human effort into a choice wine.

Jesus could have asked Peter to close his eyes for a moment and filled his boat with
fish; He could have filled the disciples' baskets with a meal or the jars at Cana with
wine; all miraculously materialised. But instead He required the physical efforts of
casting the net again, a man's sacrifice of his own food, the human obedience of
filling the jars with water. In a situation of hopelessness it was human efforts of
obedience and faith that were blessed with success. Therefore, while it is right to look
at my failures realistically, it is wrong not to trust and obey. With Jesus there is hope
in spite of my failures.

Jesus knew He could not trust the crowd which said it trusted Him (John 2:23). But
could He entrust His mission to His disciples? Weren't they totally selfish in their
ambitions to sit at His right and His left? Weren't they worldly in their values when
they rebuked the mothers who brought their children to Jesus for His blessings?
Weren't they carnal when they debated who was the greatest among them? Weren't
they too weak in their flesh to stay awake with Him in His moment of trial in
Gethsemane? And too timid to confess Him before a girl in the High Priest's home?
Didn't one of them betray Him for thirty pieces of silver while others fled to save their
lives when he faced the cross? Indeed, the material He had to work with inspired no
hope. Yet He knew that these same weak, good-for-nothing men could receive power
when the Holy Ghost came upon them and then could turn the world upside-down.
Because God's power is available for weak men, there is hope.

Jesus knew well that the sheep will not lay down their lives for their shepherd. It is the
shepherd's responsibility to lay down his life for their sake. He knew that the sheep
would all be scattered when the shepherd was slain (Matt. 26:31). Woe unto us if we
seek to serve the sheep in the hope of some returns from them. The Scriptures say,
`Cursed is the one who trusts in man' (Jer. 17:5). How can the sheep who cannot save
themselves save the shepherd? Yet, if the shepherd truly loves them, and is willing to
lay down his life for them, they will follow him (John 10:15). A grain of wheat will
abide alone until it falls to the ground and dies. „But if it dies‟, Jesus said, „it will
bring forth much fruit‟ (John 12:24). So while it is true that one cannot have hope if
he looks to his co-workers or the beneficiaries of his service, yet faith in God and
willingness to obey unto death provide solid foundation for hope.

In our conflicts with powers and principalities, I have lost many co-workers because
they looked too closely at the power of the wickedness they were up against. The
strength and cruelty of the enemy overwhelmed them and some chose to join what
appeared to them to be the stronger side, while others left the battlefield.

These co-workers have always reminded me of Saruman in Tolkien's trilogy, The

Lord of the Rings. He was a mighty wizard and knew that he should not look at the
crystal ball Palantir, but he did and saw the evil eye. When he saw the awesome
power of wickedness he became terrified, and joined the evil side. In contrast
Gandalf, another wizard, refused to look at the stone. He kept his sight focused on the
power of truth. The little hobbits have been my favourite heroes. Oblivious of the
power of wickedness and the great perils that awaited them at every turn, their only
concern was to obey their call, so they kept walking in the midst of fearsome dangers,
protected by unseen forces. That is a beautiful picture of Christian warfare. A person
who looks too closely at principalities and powers will be frightened. He will have no
reasonable basis for hope just as ten of the twelve spies that Moses sent to scout the
Promised Land concluded that they could not possibly win. It takes a Joshua to
conquer the Promised Land because he looks not at the power of the enemy but at the
commander of the armies of the Lord (Josh. 5:13-15); and therefore is willing just to
walk around the impenetrable walls of Jericho; and raise the shouts of praise and
victory by faith (Josh.6).

The inevitability of death, whether through old age or nuclear holocaust is the
ultimate logical cause for pessimism. Death and decay make all human endeavours
futile, even absurd. Fear of death is the ultimate weapon of the kingdom of Satan
(Heb.2:14-15). If you threaten the rule of wickedness in a social system, the
maximum it can do to protect itself is to eliminate you. By His death and resurrection,
However, Jesus has destroyed Satan's final weapon. He was not only raised from the
dead but was exalted to the highest position of authority in the universe. `All
authority,' said Jesus, `is given unto me in heaven and on earth' (Matt.28:18). His
victory over death in history is therefore the ultimate foundation of resurrection, the
Bible says; God will destroy death - the last enemy (1 Cor.15:26). And we will rise
with Him to eternal life. Not only human beings, but `the creation itself will be
liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the
children of God' (Rom.8:21).

Jesus who rose again bodily from the dead, who ascended into heaven and is exalted
above all principalities and powers, is coming back to earth to judge and to rule. This
gives the final basis for hope to a Christian.
But it is tragic that in our age, this doctrine of hope - the second coming of Christ -has
been read with the pessimistic outlook of the secular world and turned into the final
basis for 'Christian' pessimism.

A Hindu views God as Creator (Brahma), sustainer (Vishnu) and destroyer (Shiva).
But the Bible presents God as the Creator, Saviour and judge - not destroyer. A judge,
in the Bible, is someone who punishes the wicked and establishes justice on earth.
That is a message of hope for a man who chooses to suffer for righteousness' sake in
an age where wickedness is the way to prosper.

In Revelation chapter 6, John sees the souls of the martyrs who ask God, `How long. .
. until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge blood?' (v.10). Is it in vain,
they ask, that we chose the path of righteousness, refused to compromise with evil,
and lost our heads? Was it worth sacrificing our families, properties, pleasures and
life for Truth? They are assured that it was all worth it because God will visit the earth
in judgment.

The Scriptures say that Jesus will return with the fire of judgment.

― . . . the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day
of judgment and destruction of ungodly men‖
― . . . the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a
roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire and the earth and everything in it will
be laid bare [i.e. found]‖
―. . . But in keeping with His promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and
a new earth, the home of righteousness‖ (2 Pet.3:7,10,13).

This passage, which is meant to give a warning to the wicked and hope to the saints,
has been read by many Christians in such a way that it takes away all hope for the
social and physical world in history.

We need to realise, first of all, that the background of Peter's teaching here is the
prophesy of Malachi: `Then suddenly the Lord you are seeking will come to His
temple . . .But who can endure the day of His coming? Who can stand when He
appears? For He will be like a refiner's fire or a launderer's soap. He will sit as a
refiner and purifier of silver” ( Mal. 3:1-3).

The fire this scripture is talking about is refiner's fire which burns up the dross and
purifies the silver. The fire is for `the destruction of the ungodly men' and `the
elements'. The word „elements‘ does not refer to the elements of physical earth which
are the building blocks of our planet. The Greek for elements that Peter uses here is
stoicheia which is also used in Galatians 4:3,9 where it is translated as `basic
principles of the world' and `those weak and miserable principles,' and in Colossians
2:8, 20 where it is translated as `basic principles of the world' which are `hollow and
deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition ' and enslaves people. The
word `elements' thus refers not to the elements of modern chemistry but of Greek
thought which even has a connotation of stars and spirits of astrology that control
men. Thus, according to Peter, the fire of the Lord will burn up the `ungodly men' and
their enslaving religious principles that result in wickedness and hostility to God.
Some versions do translate 2 Peter 3:10 as `the elements will be destroyed by fire, and
the earth and everything in it will be burned up.‟ Most modern translations of the
Bible, however, correctly use the phrase `laid bare' or the more literal translation,
`found' instead of burned up. Because `found' is the literal meaning of the Greek word
heuretesetai which is the word used by Peter, according to the Sinaiticus and
Vaticanus manuscripts of New Testament. The word found in the phrase `earth will be
found' is the same joyous word used in the parable of the prodigal son, `my son was
lost but is now found', or in the parable which says that the kingdom of God is like a
man who found a pearl of great value. So what Peter is saying in 2 Peter 3:10 is not
that the earth will be burnt up, but that the ungodly men and the basic teachings of the
world that hold this world in captivity to sin and death, will be burnt up and the earth
will be refined and restored to its original status.

This interpretation of 2 Peter 3:10 is the consistent way of interpreting the text in its
context. In chapters 2 and 3 Peter relates the coming judgment with fire to the
previous judgment with fire, which was not destruction of the world in the Hindu
sense, but in the sense of judgment which purifies. Peter in concluding his teaching on
this subject again uses the word `found' in the sense of refined and found.

“Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to
be?... since you are looking forward to this [as a positive hope], make every effort to
be found spotless, blameless and at peace with him” (2 Pet.3:11-14). This positive
view of the future is also taught by Paul in Romans 8:19-21:

―The creation waits in eager expectation for the sons of God to be revealed. For
the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of
the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its
bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God.‖

Peter does not contradict Paul's teachings in his second epistle, but confirms them. He
says:

―Bear in mind that our Lord's patience [in delaying judgment] means salvation,
just as our dear brother Paul also wrote to you with the wisdom that God gave
him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters.
His letters contain some things that are hard to understand which ignorant and
unstable people distort as they do the other Scriptures to their own destruction‖(2
Peter 3:15-16).

This translation of 2 Peter 3:10b, that the earth will be `found', is also in harmony
with verse 13 which says that we are looking forward to a new earth. The word new is
not neos which means `brand new' but Kainos which means `renewed'. All that was
created as `good' will be retained and restored.* {Insertion from text: For a detailed
Bible study on this subject please see Dr. Wim Rietkerk‟s book, The Future Great
Planet Earth, to be published by Nivedit Good Books Distributors (CP) Ltd, Landour,
Mussourie, U.P., India}

This earth will not disappear, but will be given to the meek as their inheritance
(Matt.5:5). We shall not live in heaven forever, but the mansions that Jesus is
preparing in heaven (John 14:2) will come down to earth (Rev. 21:2). We shall not
live as disembodied spirits. But the dead shall rise again with glorified, non-perishable
bodies (1 Cor. 15:51-5) and God Himself will dwell on earth with His saints (John
14:23; Rev. 21:3). The physical creation will not disappear, but:

―The wilderness and dry land shall be glad, the desert shall rejoice and blossom;
like the crocus it shall blossom abundantly, and rejoice with joy and singing‖
(Isa. 35:1-2 RSV).

Nor will the animals be absent in the new earth:

―The wolf shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid,
and the calf and the lion and the fatling together, and a little child shall lead
them... The sucking child shall play over the hole of the asp; and the weaned child
shall put his hand on the adder's den‖ (Isa.11:6-9 RSV).

It is not souls of the saints that will live with Jesus, but the nations of this world:

―He shall judge between the nations, and shall decide for many peoples; and they
shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks,
nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any
more‖ (Isa. 2:4).

On the other hand, in the new earth:

―The nations will walk by its [God's city's] light, and the kings of the earth will
bring their splendour into it. On no day will its gates ever be shut, for there will
be no night there. The glory and honour of the nations will be brought into it‖
(Rev.21:24-6).

The city of God will have a river of the water of life and on each side of the river
there will be the tree of life.

―And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations. No longer will there
be any curse‖ (Rev.22:2-3).

There is hope for this planet, including for its deserts and trees, for its Creator is
faithful to His creation. He remembers His covenant not to destroy it:

Then God said to Noah and to his sons with him: ―I now establish my covenant
with you and with your descendants after you and with every living creature that
was with you - the birds, the livestock and all the wild animals, all those that came
out of the ark with you - every living creature on earth. I establish my covenant
with you: Never again will all life be cut off by the waters of a flood; never again
will there be a flood to destroy the earth‖ (Gen. 9:8-11).

The late Dr. Francis Schaeffer often used to say `man is lost but he is not zero.'
Hinduism makes Self (God) the only reality and both man (self) and the physical
world zero, i.e., Maya or a projection of universal consciousness; like a dream that
can be both created and destroyed. Much of modern scientific thought also reduces
man to zero - a mere machine or an animal. The behavioural school of psychology
denies that man is a person who makes real choices. He, according to them, is no
different from a machine where everything is determined by external causes.
Likewise, the view that the universe is not the work of a personal creator, but a
product of random chance and impersonal energy make the physical world zero. The
Christian view, on the other hand, is: the physical universe and man are both works of
a personal creator who declared them to be good. He is faithful to His creation, and
this fact puts great value on both man and the earth.

Man is not zero, but he is a sinner. The earth is not zero, but is cursed because of
man's sin. God is not “Destroyer”, but a judge who will punish sin and destroy all the
consequences of sin, because He seeks to redeem His creation. This is a message of
great hope for the future of this earth. Not only the earth, but Paul says that even
believers will go through refiner's fire:

―If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver costly stones, wood, hay
or straw, his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to
light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each man's
work. If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward. If it is burned up,
he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the
flames‖ (1 Cor.3:12-15).

That the fire of God will consume all that is sinful in me and in the world is not a
message of doom, but of hope which should make us work to build things that will
last for eternity. The fact that our works of beauty and value will be refined and will
last, must cause us to thank God.

―We give thanks to you, Lord God Almighty,

the One who is and who was,
because you have taken your great power
and have begun to reign.
The nations were angry;
and your wrath has come.
The time has come for judging the dead,
and for rewarding your servants
the prophets and your saints
and those who reverence your name,
both small and great -
and for destroying those who
destroy the earth‖ (Rev. 11:17-18).

The Significance of Human Action

The Christian's hope for a better future rests not on his own record of success, but on
Christ's victory in history over sin, Satan and death, and on His promise to return as
judge and ruler.

Does that make human action insignificant and irrelevant? No because the purpose of
God's saving action is to restore man's dominion on earth. The consequence of
Adam's sin was that man who was meant to be the ruler became a slave on earth, not
only to Satan and sin, but to nature as well. The earth began to grow thorns and
thistles and he had to eat of the sweat of his brow. In his struggle with nature, man
ultimately lost, died and became dust. Physical nature won over its ruler - man. Death
became the master. But by defeating death and giving eternal life to those who repent
and believe, God is restoring to man his authority over the world. Jesus did not come
to take our souls to a non-material, eternal Heaven, but to restore the Kingdom to us.
Saints do go to Heaven when they die. But they wait there to return with Christ to rule
on this earth. Heaven is a waiting-room until the great restoration. The purpose of
salvation is to make us kings and priests, or the `royal priesthood' as Peter puts it (1
Pet. 2:9). Man is given the task to rule. He had lost the kingdom and become a slave.
Jesus saves us from sin and gives us His authority to rule.

As the elders and the heavenly creatures sing to the lamb of God:

―You are worthy to take the scroll

and to open its seals,
because you were slain,
and with your blood you
purchased men for God
from every tribe and language and
people and nation.
You have made them to be
a kingdom and priests to
serve our God,
and they will reign on earth‖ (Rev.5:9-10).

The Christians' future is not to worship God in heaven through eternity, but to reign
on earth. Paul says that we who were dead in trespasses and sins have already been
raised to life and made to sit with Christ in a position of authority to do good works
(Eph. 2:1-10). A believer, therefore, has the responsibility to exercise his authority in
his situation. As my friend Chandrakant Shourie says, “When Israel stood before the
Red Sea, the angel of the Lord who was going ahead of them, went behind them to
protect them from Pharaoh's army. The angel in a pillar of fire would not let them go
back, but in front of them was the sea. They were trapped. God did not ask the angel
to divide the sea. The rod of authority was placed in man's hand. Moses was asked to
raise the rod over the sea. Man has to act in obedience and faith. It could be that
Moses had to hold the rod over the seas the whole night, for it says:

―Then Moses stretched out his hand over the sea, and all that night the Lord
drove the sea back with a strong east wind and turned it into dry land. The waters
were divided, and the Israelites went through the sea on dry ground‖ (Exod.
14:21-22).

God is the one who delivers us from slavery. But He has given the rod of authority to
man. Man has to act in obedience of faith if he wants to see God's power to deliver.

Witnesses not Revolutionaries

If God is the deliverer then man is primarily a witness to divine deliverance, not the
saviour Himself. To be a witness, however, does not mean to live on a `spiritual'
plane, removed from the realities of daily life. To bear witness to the kingship of
Christ is to pick up a fight with the prince of death, who wishes to keep this world in
bondage to decay.

After His resurrection the disciples asked Jesus, `Lord, are you at this time going to
restore the kingdom to Israel? '(Acts 1:6). They had seen themselves as failures.
Earlier they had promised to fight for His kingdom. Now they knew that they
couldn't. So if the Kingdom had to come, it had to be God's action - `are you at this
time going to restore the kingdom? It is tragic that often the Christians who take our
future hope most seriously choose to spend their time in trying to figure out the time
of His arrival, instead of seeking to become witnesses of His Kingship.

Jesus replies, `It is not your job to sit back and try to find out the timetable of my
return. I know you do not have the power to challenge the kingdom of Satan. But you
will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you. Then you will have a
role to play. You will go out with my authority to the uttermost parts of the world and
bear witness to my kingship.‟
APPENDIX ONE:

YOU CAN SERVE THE POOR WITHOUT GIVING AWAY YOUR MONEY

[NOTE : This appendix and the proposal that follows are reproduced from the first
two editions of the book as an example only. For the current status of the project
mentioned please see the note at the end of the proposal]

Deena was an untouchable, poverty-stricken landless man when he heard about Jesus
a few years ago. He committed his life to Christ together with four others from his
village. A little congregation was born and it helped him get a small plot of land.
Gradually Deena was helped by other Christians to dig a well, borrow a pair of oxen
and start farming.

On April 13th, 1984, he came to me and said, „Brother, the Government has fixed the
price of grain at 250 rupees per quintal [100 kg], but nobody in the market is prepared
to give me more then 235 rupees. What should I do?‟

„Don‟t sell it,‟I advised him.

„Brother,‟ he said, „my wife has been asking me to get her a new sari, because the
only one she has is torn to shreds. I therefore have to sell this grain, so that I can get
her the sari. Though, in fact, I need to keep it for food and seed. If I don‟t return home
with the sari, she will be deeply hurt.‟

„Well, listen to me,‟ I insisted. „Don‟t sell the grain.‟

A friend of mine took the bag of grain to the warehouse, and deposited it there. Then
he took the warehouse receipt for the bag, and pledged it to the State Bank of India as
security, and arranged with them to give Deena a loan of 237 rupees.

Three months later an excited Deena stopped me on the highway and said that the
warehouse manager had advised him to sell his bag of grain as the price had now gone
up from 235 to 450 rupees per quintal.

Deena had used 237 rupees so he could not release his bag. We had to advance the
cash. After paying 11 rupees‟ interest to the bank, he earned 202 rupees extra on one
bag of grain.

A village that sells 1,000 bags of grain would have earned 202x 1,000=202,000
rupees. The village would then need neither the donor agencies nor the Government
to start a school, a health-care centre or a drinking-water project. It would have the
money to purchase the services it needs and thus become self-sustaining.

In 1984, we were able to persuade the Agricultural Development branch of the State
Bank of India to finance twenty other poor farmers like Deena. Soon some powerful
people saw the enormous economic potential of this scheme in favour of the poor and
so they exerted political pressure on the bank manager who stopped financing the
scheme. The bank also felt that all small peasants would see the advantage of
the scheme and would flood them with applications for credit against their grain. The
bank would not be able to cope with the paperwork required to lend to thousands of
farmers.

In 1985 we persuaded another bank to finance the farmers; however, we are afraid
that this bank‟ management will also give in to the political pressures (because it, too,
is nationalised), bribes (which the merchants will no doubt offer), and just the
pressure of increased work.

So we are now forced to build up our own revolving fund to finance the poor, and we
want to do it without putting any burden on your budget, through the scheme.

Serve While You Save

Many agencies come to you with appeals for money for development projects, but we
are inviting you to participate in a movement of service to the poor while you save for
your future.

„Is that possible?‟ Our answer is an emphatic „Yes!‟ Twelve years of direct
involvement with the poor in India have convinced us.

Development Is an Issue of Justice Not of Charity

As the Bible says,„A poor man‟s field may produce abundant food, but injustice
sweeps it away‟ (Prov. 13:23).

The small farmer in India is poor and lives at or below the subsistence level because
he rarely recovers his production cost. He is forced to sell his wheat (for example) at
162 rupees per bag (100 kg or 200lb), whereas the production cost is approximately
262 rupees per bag. The farmer makes no money and is therefore unable to pay the
necessary minimum wages to the hired labourers. Yet the business community and the
Government make anywhere between 50 to 200 rupees per bag of wheat. The farmer
who cannot make ends meet is forced to exploit not only his laborers, but his land,
forest, cattle, family and his own body also. During the British Raj, cotton produced
by the Indian farmer was purchased at an extremely low price and taken to the mills in
England. The mill-made cloth was then resold in India at a high profit, taking the
wealth of India back to England at the expense of the poor primary producers in India.
We called it injustice, exploitation and slavery; historians called it Pax Britannica!

National independence in 1947 changed the situation only slightly. The first planning
commission was persuaded by the Russian example, that India could accumulate the
capital for industrialisation only if it did not pay remunerative prices for agricultural
produce, i.e., if it exploited 80 per cent of its population. This policy has continued to
this day. Each harvest has been used to transfer money from the field to the factory,
from the village to the city, from the poor to the rich. This is PAX INDIANA! During
the decade of 1971-81 alone ,22,500 million (pounds) have been transferred from the
agricultural to the non-agricultural sector. Because this transfer has taken place not
through savings and investment, but through a socialistic strategy of force and fraud,
the capital is gone, but the population has remained on the land. The peasants have
simply become poorer.

The grip of the rich over the economic system has become so strong now that to break
these chains of slavery and to liberate the poor from this unjust exploitation will
require nothing less than a nationwide movement on the scale of the independence
struggle. But let us first look at the microscopic level of 1,200 villages in Chatarpur
district of Madhya Pradesh, where the writer has been directly involved with the poor
since 1976.

The reason I insisted that Deena should not sell his grain after the harvest in 1984 was
because of what I had seen happen the previous year. In 1983, the Government had
announced the „support price‟ of
grain to be 235 rupees per bag. When the farmers brought the grain to the
procurement centre during the day, they were usually told, „Sorry - the cash has not
come yet.‟ Instead of taking the grain back to the village, the farmers preferred to sell
it to the merchants at 180 rupees per bag, because they could not be sure that they
would get the „support price‟ even if they returned the next day. In the evenings, the
merchants passed on the grain to the procurement centre at 235 rupees per bag,
sharing the profit of 55 rupees a bag with officials.

Later in the year, the Government sold the grain at the wholesale rate of 365-390
rupees per bag, making a further profit of 145 a bag. Then the merchants sold the
same grain at 425-450 rupees a bag. A Government officer said to me, „The MP
Government has earned hundreds of millions on grain‟. On a million bags, the total
net profit of the Government and the merchants works out to be more than 200
million rupees. This is profit. What the farmers get is not even the production cost. Is
there any wonder then that the city is now mushrooming with videos and TVs
whereas so many villages have no drinking water, no roads, no school buildings or
even first aid clinics? The village folk still drink contaminated water and wear rags.

This enslavement of the poor by the rich, of the village by the city, is as evil as any
colonialism ever was. It makes us ashamed. It moves us to call for a new national
struggle for justice to the poor. What can be done about this injustice? Distributing
charity or technology is certainly no answer. Increasing productivity through
development projects will not help. The need is to change the unjust system and
oppressive ideology that under-girds the system. As the Bible says, God‟s desire for
us is „to loose the chains of injustice and untie the cords of the yoke, to set the
oppressed free and break every yoke‟ (Isa. 58:6).

AUTHOR‟S POST-SCRIPT ON THE CURRENT STATUS OF THE PROJECT

As a result of this project and my other work with the peasants I was invited to serve
as the National Convenor of the Peasant‟s Commission of the Janata Party. That
position enabled me to write the approach paper for India‟s Agricultural Policy. After
the Janata Dal formed the national Government in 1989 several of my proposals were
incorporated into the national policy. The nationalized banks, for example, are now
required to lend to all farmers who wish to avoid “distress selling” with the help of
warehousing. The above project, therefore, has achieved its purpose and has been
wound up. The Indian Groundworks Trust, however, continues to support other
initiatives in India. The appendix and the proposal have been retained in this edition
mainly to serve as an illustration of what can be done for the poor.

Now that the interest in the thesis of this book has begun to create ripples in the minds
of Christians in many nations, I would like to invite the reader‟s prayerful
involvement in the proposal contained in Appendix Two.
APPENDIX TWO:

A World View for World Healing:

Conferences for Christian Students Concerned for APPLYING TRUTH TO SOCIAL
REFORM

Inaugural Conference:
January 1-4, 1998 (dates tentative)
Phoenix

"I have frequently suggested that, at the edge of the Third Millennium,
Christianity...is uniquely situated to be the culture-forming dynamic in world history.
After the end of Marxism, Christianity provides the only coherent, comprehensive,
compelling, and promising vision of the human future..."
---Richard John Neuhaus, First Things (October 1996), p. 74

"The 21st century will be religious or it will not be at all."

---Andre Malraux (French intellectual, 1986)

"...the problem of the school and the university is the most critical problem affecting
Western civilization today...at the heart of the crisis in Western civilization lies the
state of the mind and the spirit of the university...responsible Christians face two
tasks---that of saving the soul and that of saving the mind."
---Charles Malik (former United Nations Secretary General), quoted by Alan Crippen

The Eve of the Third Millennium

For Europeans, the second millennium was birthed in the secure womb of the Holy
Roman Empire, with its vision of Christ triumphant over culture. Christianity was
less than triumphant, not only because of theological flaws within Christendom but
also because Confucius, Lord Krishna, Gautama Buddha, Allah, and millions of tribal
gods and goddesses commanded allegiance outside of Christendom.

This same millennium ends in the afterglow of a once-secure liberal humanism,

formerly confident in human reason as the basis for human culture, now flickering
amidst the pessimistic breezes of post-modernism. For all its boast in the
establishment of nation-states, of international forums (such as the UN), of
technological and scientific achievements beyond all imagination, and of thousands of
institutions for higher education, the humanists have failed to triumph just as had
Christendom of a thousand years earlier.

So, at the doorstep of the third millennium there is no reigning paradigm, no

triumphant voice beyond that of a militant Islam whose passion and purpose is largely
a reaction against hollow Western secularism. Who will offer genuine hope to the
nations, threatened by the demoralizing impact of almost universal corruption and
bribery, the crumbling of national borders in the wake of the global exchange of
goods and information, and the never-ending tragedy of billions in poverty? Is it
possible that the hundreds of thousands of international students in the USA are the
key to the transformation of the nations?

The Vision
To capture the imagination of a new generation of students, by challenging them to
creatively and courageously impact the destiny of their nations with the transforming
power of Christ and the Christian world view.

Target Participants

The conference is targeted at the estimated 40,000 Christian international students,

scholars, and visiting faculty who populate our colleges, universities, and seminaries
in North America. A second group that is invited are "serious seekers", people who
are very open to a Christian worldview and who are prepared to explore together with
us what it means to effect Christian transformation within the context of our societies.
A third target are a small but select group of American Christian college and
university students, signifying their global partnership for the healing of nations,
including the USA. Projected attendance is 300 - 500 students, scholars, and visiting
faculty.

Sponsorship

By design, this conference will be undertaken and advertised as a collaborative effort.

The MacLaurin Institute will serve by providing leadership and administrative
direction, coordinating with members of the Garden Valley Fellowship and other like-
minded groups and organizations.
Why is The Conference Strategic?

1. Today's students in US colleges and universities are strategically leveraged

to influence the destiny of nations.

* US universities and colleges breed and promote the ideas that directly
impact
the policies and practices of nations around the globe, via
students and scholars who return

* The US State Department estimates that, at any given time, 25% of the
world's
future leaders are studying in the USA

* Mark Rentz, a Christian at the Arizona State University, has extensively

documented the correlation between a US education and leadership back home.

(see his "Diplomats in Our Backyard", Newsweek, February 16, 1987)
* The Polish government, for example, has four Fulbright scholarship
recipients in its cabinet

* It is estimated that at least 20% of the world's heads-of-state studied in the

USA

2. The USA is the meeting ground for the nations.

*Over 200 nations are represented in US colleges and universities, and most
major universities host students from well over 100 different countries

*As the world's meeting ground, the USA provides the context for critical
Christian engagement on matters such as reconciliation (e.g., the public
reconciliation between Korean and Japanese students at the 1994 Post-
Urbana
Conference for Internationals, sponsored by InterVarsity)

3. The scope and depth of global problems offers a window of opportunity for
biblically-based solutions that honor Christ's lordship

* See Robert Kaplan's cover article in the February 1995 Atlantic Monthly:
"The
Coming Anarchy"

* Post-modernism in Western higher education has yielded a pessimism

concerning
the future

* Many nations, particularly in Africa where a massive grassroots Christian

revival is underway, are ripe for an infusion of thoughtful Christian leaders
who may very well be able to directly transform the social and political institutions in
their societies

* Since 1989 (nominally understood to be the end of the Cold War), there
have been 85 major conflicts globally, of which 35 were wars. Two-thirds of these
conflicts were within national boundaries (Robert Seiple, World Vision).
4. There is a growing pool of Christian international students who need leadership
training.

*In the past ten years, it is estimated that ministry to international students and
scholars has doubled, even as the international population has only grown by 25%;
thus, the percentage of new international Christians needing leadership training has
significantly increased

*Virtually all international student ministries are focused on evangelism and

discipleship, and are usually not equipped to offer advanced leadership training
5. Students need to see that Jesus practically influences the destiny of their nations.

* The Reformation had a profound impact on Northern Europe

* Lamin Sanneh's (professor at Yale) research on the culture-building impact

of the Gospel (cf. Encountering the West)

* Vishal Mangalwadi's research that shows the early missionaries positively

impacted Indian society (cf. William Carey: Tribute By An Indian Woman and
Missionary Conspiracy: Letters To a Post-Modern Hindu)

* This wonderfully complements the historic Christian emphasis on personal

conversion by demonstrating both the socio-cultural rationale and product of salvation

* 1994 research among 118 Christian internationals at the Urbana Post-

Conference for Internationals revealed very high interest in conferences and seminars
on this topic, as well as those offering biblical and Christian perspectives on their
vocations and academic disciplines

6. International student and American student ministries are, more than ever before,
committed to large-scale collaboration.

* This event will also include collaboration with relief and development
agencies (such as Food for the Hungry, YWAM's Mercy Ships, and Harvest)

* The Bedford Conversation (October 4-6, 1996) highlighted the collaborative

vision of international student ministries

Why is the Conference Unique?

1. It brings together a truly international array of speakers who understand and

address the impact of the Christian world view on the destiny of the nations.

2. It is a first-ever context for groups of Christian nationals to meet together to pray,

to discuss, and to strategize a Christian vision for healing, blessing, and discipling
their nations. In all likelihood, continuing groups will develop along national or
regional lines

3. It brings together international and American college and university students and
scholars as partners in the global Christian enterprise.

4. It serves as the catalyst for a variety of envisioned programmatic endeavors that

will continue and enlarge the conversation:

Summer Institutes in Theology, Economics, and Community Development

Internships for Future Change Agents
Christian world view curriculum for use by trained campus staff ministers
Future regional and national "A World View for World Healing" conferences
Regional international seminarian conferences.
Plans are already underway to begin training over the next five years, 10,000
churches in India in biblical worldview and wholistic discipleship, as it relates to the
soul of India.

5. It demonstrates Christian engagement with the pressing problems of bribery and

corruption, ethnic hatred, poverty and intolerance.

6. It aims to publish a set of papers from the conference.

*These will be available with study guides

*Published in English and several other major languages (such as Chinese,

Japanese, Korean, Spanish, Russian and French)

7. By heavily recruiting in Christian colleges and seminaries, this conference enables

future church leaders to interact with future business, political, and educational
leaders concerning God's intentions for their societies.
Program

The program will include plenary sessions, workshops, and worship centered on
God's intentions for our nations. Objectives:
i. Communicate the outlines of a biblical world view
ii. Identify God's purposes in the history and future of our nations
iii. Discover a deep sense of responsibility for the future of our nations
iv. Identify the central role of the church in the healing of nations
v. Learn how to be a Christian change agent within the context of one's
vocational calling
vi. Enable students to meet with fellow countrymen to discuss and pray
over the future of their nations. By the use of "worldview mapping", students will
also identify cultural idolatries and cultural signposts of the Kingdom within their
cultures, and begin identifying strategies for promoting
God's healing of their nations.
vii. Provide practical examples of Christians who have profoundly
affected
the destiny of their nations, especially stories of returnees
viii. Learn Biblical teaching concerning leadership, corruption, bribery,

reconciliation, and political and economic development, and discover some strategies
for bringing resolution in these areas.

The MacLaurin Institute

The MacLaurin Institute is named after Colin MacLaurin, a devout believer in Jesus
Christ and Great Britain's finest scientist in the 18th century. As a Christian study
center based at the University of Minnesota, the Institute's mission is "to present the
Christian world view to university and international scholars so that they will bring
Christ's transforming influence to their cultures and academic disciplines".

The founder is Dr. William Monsma, now serving as Director of Academic Programs.
Robert Osburn serves as Director, along with his role as Director of International
Programs. Several other staff and fellows are associated with the Institute. The
board is composed of Dr. Chris Macosko (Professor, University of Minnesota), Dr. V.
Elving Anderson (Professor Emeritus, University of Minnesota), Dr. Rutherford Aris
(Professor Emeritus, University of Minnesota), Dr. Sandra Menssen (Professor, St.
Thomas University), Fen Hiew (Management Team, Reliastar Financial
Corporation), and the two staff directors.

The Institute is a 501 (c) (3) non-profit chartered under the laws of the State of
Minnesota.

For further information and involvement contact:

Bob Osburn, Director, The MacLaurin Institute
331 17th Ave SE, Minneapolis, MN 55414
(Phone: US +1 6123782159 Call ; US +1 8005828541 Call ; Fax: 612-378-1935)
Internet: [email protected]
Website: www.maclaurin.org
CREDITS

Proof-Reading - Ted West, Shailesh Mark

Editing - Prof. (Dr.) D. Blank
Finance - C.L.A.S.P.
Office Assistance - M. A. Hope
Printing - Ajay Verma
Technical Assistance - Tony Malik
Cover Design -
Production - Nivedit M. Daliya

NOTES:
See page 65 on the Greek word ecclesia. Very strong political sense behind the word.