Are All Sins Equal?

Are All Sins Equal? (In 1000 words)

The simple answer is Yes and No. We can consider it in three headings:

I.                  CONSEQUENCE OF SIN

1.     Potential of Sins: The end result of all sins is the same – eternal separation from God, and eternal damnation (Rom 6:23). The solution for all sins is also only through one Saviour, Lord Jesus Christ (Rom 6:23). Before God, all sins are an abomination. Small or big sins (humanly speaking), all sins make us miss the standard of God’s holiness (Rom 3:23). Sin is anything that falls short of the glory of God. Only one sin can cost you eternal damnation. The Bible says in James 2:10, “For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all.” In fact, sin is not primarily about committing or omitting by an individual; rather sin is already enslaving us for we are a sinner by nature, from our conception (Eph 2:1-3; Ps 51:5). Therefore, no matter how much or how less we think we do, we are all guilty before God; and the fitting place is the lake of fire because of the demand of God’s holiness. Everyone is a sinner since before we know what is right and wrong. Sin entered the world through Adam, and all died and will die because of sin (Rom 5:12; 1Cor 15:22). This alone, also known as “original sin” is serious enough to condemn us to hell. We sin because we are sinful at the core of our nature. Whatever we do is sinful-though not necessarily as sinful as a sinner can be-unless God regenerates our dead soul. God will not allow any sin to go unpunished. Are All Sins Equal? YES. Serious Enough For God’s Wrath.

2.     Actual Judgment of Sins: Some sins are worse than the others. The Bible says clearly in many passages that there is a degree of sins, and so the judgments too. (Luke 7: 41-47; 12: 47-48). There are greater sins (Eze. 8:6 , 13, 15). The Mosaic laws differentiate intentional and unintentional sins (Lev 4:2, 13, 22, 27). Jesus in his teaching about the Kingdom of Heaven and the Law declares judgment concerning the degree of commitment (Matthew 5:19).  Moreover, Jesus says in John 19: 11, “You could have no power at all against Me unless it had been given you from above. Therefore the one who delivered Me to you has the greater sin.” Matthew 11:20-24 also gives enough evidence about the degree of Judgment. Even the Believers Judgment of 1Cor 3:12-15 implies the degree of judgment. And still Hebrews 10:26-29 talks about the worst punishments. Are All Sins Equal? NO. As a man sows, so shall he reap!

II.               SOLUTION FOR SINS

God is not only a righteous and just God but also a merciful and gracious God. God will not just send anyone to hell because of the original sin. He provides salvation in Jesus. People go to hell on their choices. (John 3:16-18; 8:21, 24). Moreover, Galatians 6: 7 says “whatever a man sows that he will also reap.”

1.     Pardonable: Jesus’ blood suffices for the forgiveness of all sins (Heb 10:10; 2: 17; Rom 3:25; 1John 2:2; 4:10) The Condition is to believe in the Person and Work of Jesus Christ by the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit. (John 3: 8, 16). If one knows Christ (is saved), his sins are no longer counted. Big sins or small sins do not matter. He has become the righteousness of God in Christ (2 Cor 5:21)

2.     Unpardonable Sin: Sins are not equal. It matters what sin you commit. There is a sin that leads to death, which should not be asked for forgiveness (1John 5:16). Hebrews 6:4-6 talks about the impossibility of repentance towards God for Salvation. More so, Christ talks about the unpardonable sin in Matt.12: 31-32 “Therefore I say to you, any sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven people, but blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven. Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the [age] to come.” We understand this in the light of John 3:17-18; Heb 10: 26-29; Matthew 7:21-23. No matter how you feel, no matter how much good work (including Christian work) you do, no matter whatsoever, if you reject Christ constantly, you die in your sin.

III.           POSITION OF A SINNER

1.     Redeemed Sinner: All the sins of believers are justified in the Cross (Heb 10: 14; 1John 1:9). There is nothing that he can do to lose his salvation (Rom 8:31-39). No sin has any effect on his eternal position. Moreover, a believer is free from the law of sin and death (Rom 8:2). However, sin matters in the earthly life. Believers sin (1John1:8) and therefore, God chastises His children (Hebrews 12:3-11). And that too, in God’s sovereignty, all things work out together for good (Romans 8:28). And one day he shall be free from the practice and presence of sin (Romans 8:29-30).

2.     Unregenerate Sinner: He has no forgiveness of sins both in earth and eternity (John 3:17-18). Sin reigns over him. He is bondage to sin (John 8:48). Death reigns over him physically and spiritually; earthly and eternally. (Rom 5: 12-14). Moreover, God has no obligation to do good for sinners (Proverbs 28:9). Non-believers live in guilt and finally go to the eternal lake of fire.

The effect and consequence of sin are different for a believer (redeemed sinner) and a non-believer (unregenerate sinner). Sins Are Not Equal.

CONCLUSION: Sins in the sight of God are all the same. It demands His holiness against it – damnation and eternal separation. There is no small sin that God will look over it and let you be in heaven. However, God punishes and will punish sin according to the degree of sin. Jesus provides the only Salvation for the forgiveness of sins. He who believes is saved and He who does not believe (reject) dies in his sin (which is the eternal torment). A believer is freed from sin and a  non-believer is a slave of sin. The Effect And Consequence Of Sin Are Not The Same.

2021 Top 3 Dream Books

Only 9 books with over 6,300 pages. Only 30,000 rupees if you want to buy. It will require you only around 350 hours to read. If you do the math, you have to spend 85 rupees an hour just to read these books. The irony is many will not read even if they are offered 85 rupees an hour for reading them. Sure, not all books in book shops are good. We must read books selectively. According to Steve Lawson, we should not buy good books, not even better books, we must buy only the best books. Maybe we should read only the best books too! While these books (above in the pictures) might not be appealing to some of us (and rightly so), I would eagerly spend 30,000 rupees to buy them if I have a budget. Hopeful to own and read all of them within the next few years. Btw, these are just My Top 3 List right now. 

Random WSU9

08 July 19 WSU

09 July 19 WSU

Understanding Christ-Centered Preaching: Christo-Centric or Christo-Telic?

While I was in Seminary, one of our professors required us to listen to The Master’s Seminary Chapel Lecture Series on Christ-Centered Preaching. We were asked to take notes however we liked and to turn into him as an un-credited assignment. Following are the short notes I had taken (23^rd September 2016). If you are a student of preaching, this lecture series will clarify the difference between Christo-centric preaching and Christo-telic preaching when we seek to preach a Christ-centered sermon. If you are tempted to stop reading, never mind, scroll down, at least read the summary.

Lecture 1 Dr. Richard L. Mayhue

          He gave an overview of Christ-centered Preaching (CCP) under 3 headings: 1. An introductory overview of recent CCP. 2. Overview of Impropriety or Improperness of CCP. 3. Overview of Legitimate Biblical CCP. His lecture was based on 2 Corinthians 4:5. “Critically important issues.” “Difficult to address like trying to answer yes/no answer to a question “Have you stopped beating your wife?”

          Marks of CCP: Christ-centered theme and purpose. OT alone is nothing. Christ in every text - allegorically or typologically. Redemptive History. Multiple meaning. Explain from OT preaching. However, there are a variety of emphases in the proponents of CCP. Proponents are covenantal in their Theology, reformed or Presbyterian in their denomination.

He argued that they cause an improper view of God, Scripture, and Hermeneutic. He contended that it should be Christo-telic and not Christo-centric.  The picture of Father and Spirit is dim in their practices. He gave a good overview of the times Christ is mentioned in the Scriptures - in each chapter and books of the NT.

He suggested that we must be a new covenant Preacher to be a Legitimate Biblical CCP Preacher.

 

Lecture 2 Dr. Busenitz

          He gave a Historical Perspective of CCP. He compares CCP to Allegorical Preaching. The outline can be noted as follows - 1. The Church Fathers (Allegorical). 2. The Reformers (Allegorical). 3. The school of Historical-Grammatical Hermeneutic across the century.

          Allegory is common in the early days, even in the times of Jesus to Philo to Origen to Luther. Their intention was noble, however, the method is not justifiable. Allegory is closely associated with Typology. The meaning of the Scripture is one - not four or five as thought by Origen and others. Luther said allegory is empty speculation.

          Historical-Grammatical Hermeneutic is traced back to Theodore of Tarsus to Chrysostom to Calvin. Calvin is Theoc-entric preaching.

          In the end, he gave three lessons learned from Church History:

1.  Allegory is dangerous, so we must avoid it.

2.  Good motives do not justify the bad method.

3.  There is a close link between Allegorical Preaching and CCP

He finished with 2 Tim 2:15-16

 

Lecture 3 Dr. Chou

          He gave the evaluation of CCP’s Hermeneutics. His lecture is based on 2 Tim 2:15. Three Headings are noted: 1. Explanation of CCP Hermeneutics. 2. Evaluation of CCP Hermeneutics. 3. Sufficiency of Historical-Grammatical Hermeneutics. Chou gave lots of helpful information about many things, apart from his evaluation of CCP.

          He defined and explained what “meaning” and “significance” is. Legitimate implications must be derived from the meaning of the text, for it is often that there can be lots of implications. CCP says that the contextual meaning is good, but not enough. They say, “Christ is the subject topic of every text.” “FCF is the window to the gospel……. and is brought out by analogy of contrast or comparisons.” [FCF - Fallen Condition Focus]

          In evaluating it, he said the proponents employed Redemptive theological hermeneutics. He also evaluated the proof texts of the proponents. He explained those texts in their contexts and concluded that it establishes Historical-Grammatical Hermeneutics rather than CCP Hermeneutics.

          Finally, He made a case for Historical-Grammatical Hermeneutics. He proved what it means and the ramification of both kinds of Hermeneutics. He said Biblical Preaching based on Historical-Grammatical Hermeneutics is a mandate. Historical-Grammatical Hermeneutics is more than sufficient to expound the glory of Christ.

          He offered three ways how Christ is observed in OT: Prophecy of Christ, Preparation for Christ, and Christ as Participant. Historical-Grammatical Hermeneutics lets the text speak and brings forth the multifaceted of the glory of Christ. He demonstrated that by NT use of the OT.

          He challenged the listener that the proponents of Historical-Grammatical Hermeneutics must first demonstrate it before pointing to others. We must be studious and honor Christ, not only on Pulpit but also in our Preparation. “Not just in the end but the means.” “Are you willing to do the high and noble task?”

 

Lecture 4 Dr. Mook

          He demonstrated WHERE and HOW is Christ in the Old Testament. The primary text of his lecture is 2 Timothy 3:16. He mentioned Christ and Apostle preached Old Testament. Then he talked about the Messiah from Historical books, Psalms, and the Prophets. Jesus as Prophet and King and Priest can be understood only from the proper knowledge of the concept of each role in the OT. CCP without proper regard to that context can dilute and misinform the role of Christ. He mentioned various Scripture portions where Messiah is in it.

          He criticized Graeme Goldsworthy’s Interpretation and his hermeneutics. Goldsworthy overrides the Authorial Intent by his covenant theological approach. He took the example of Psalm 1 and Isaiah 2:1-4.

 

Lecture 5 Dr. Essex

          He gave the evaluation of CCP Homiletics. The question is not who is against Preaching Christ. Bryan Chapel has put CCP on the evangelical map in the 1980s. The heritage of CCP is Allegory or excessive of Typology.  Dr. Essex gave an impression that CCP has gone into the evangelical map like a storm because of His (Chapel) credentials and skills, and not necessarily because of Biblical basis.

          Christo-telic (points to) and Christo-centric (about) must be distinguished. For Chapel, the Redemptive historical model which is the “Fallen Condition Focus” is employed to get a Christ-centered sermon. The redemptive nature of God. “Find out all (both regenerate and non-regenerate including the Apostles) failures, and God’s response to those failures.” “Grace” is big, but is that the central, all the thrust of all passages?

          “Every Expositor should be textually driven, and audience sensitive,” said Dr. Essex. “We are all fallen. How do we live out now?” is what CCP wrestles.  Homiletics is a study of the preparation and delivery of the homily. Theo-centric, Spirit-centric in Romans 8. The proof text of CCP Proponents are not the model of preaching, it must be understood in its context. Triune-Centric must be done. Salvation is not done by Christ alone.

          FCF is done by a theological construct (Presbyterian - redemptive-historical hermeneutics and homiletics), a pre-understanding before coming to the text. “Not as a fallen man, but as a called man in Eph. 4,” says Dr. Essex. God’s character is not just grace - but omnipotent, supremacy etc., not just a redemptive aspect. Preach where Christ is. Chapel is though not monotone, but there is a sameness in all his sermons. His sermon is almost predictable, thus it is not from the text but an imposition on the text.

          He concluded that it is not a personal attack, but an argument. Be a discerning Preacher.

Lecture 6 Dr. Murphy

          He lectured on the theme of how to preach an Old Testament text. He maintained that Sidney Greidanus has done lots but the covenantal based conclusion is not agreeable. “Christ is not ultimately the point of every text even in the NT,” says Dr. Murphy. “Spurgeon is a Christ-centered Preacher.” “I do not make Christ every point of my sermon, however, I do not hesitate to refer Christ in any of my messages,” says Murphy. If you want to preach Christ, preach from NT.

          3 Basic Principles of how to preach OT for today’s context: 1. Christ is rightly seen in many passages. If He is the point, make it; such as Gen 3:15, Ps 2, Isaiah 53. 2. Christ is neither the point, nor even remotely the point in some passages. It is an abuse of text if you preach Christ there. Such as “our Pastor preaches Calvinism” would be the symptoms. 3. Christ is not the only truth the Church needs to know. Acts 20:18-27; 1 Cor. 10:6ff “not just to see Christ but to learn a spiritual lesson.” Eph. 4:11; 2 Tim 3:16.

          Greidanus mentioned 7 ways of Preaching Christ from OT. Some of them are good. Genesis 1 is a perfect world and does not have a redemptive aspect. Greidanus finds it difficult to preach it. The message what the Church needs is not just Christ - Genesis - creationism is important.

          In an evangelistic context, it is completely appropriate to make Christ the point. Even then, one must handle the text properly in the context - not with creativity to make Jesus the point. We must preach the whole counsel of God - week after week.

 

Summary:

          Christ-centered Preaching must be defined properly before we talk about whether we are for it or against it. If it means Preaching Christ, every minister of NT Church is given the mandate to do so. However, the issue is whether one should preach EVERY sermon from ANY passage of the Bible with Christ as the subject. The answer is “No!”

          Also, one should not preach ONLY Christ, and nothing else even from the New Testament. Christian needs the whole counsel of God (as Dr. Murphy points out Acts 20:18-27; 1 Cor. 10:6ff; Eph. 4:11; 2 Tim 3:1).

          The legitimate Biblical model of Christ-centered Preaching is Christo-telic.  Christo-centric is wrong both in homiletic and hermeneutics when you force into any and every passage of the Bible.

          The legitimate way of exalting Christ is to preach Him where He is. Forcing in where He is not, is abusing the text, and rips off the richness and God-intent purpose of that passage which He puts in His wisdom.

          We are not supposed to force in Christ where He is not, however, we do not need to hesitate to refer Christ when appropriate. Especially, in Evangelistic settings or depending on the audience, one can make Christ as the subject, provided one handles the text properly in the context. This is not the norm. In fact, why should one preach from where He is not there when there are scores of Christological passages available?

What does it mean to preach Christ? It means to preach Christ where He is found. It is almost everywhere in the NT. We are NT people, designed and called out by God. We can give more time and effort there. In the OT, there are passages where Christ is found explicitly (Messianic, etc.) we preach there Christ.

Even in other passages, we may have a Christo-telic-approach (pointing to Christ for the ultimate fulfillment), but not as the theme or subject of the passage. Do we need to PREACH CHRIST? Yes, faithful to the text.

Christo-centric Method is on a slippery slope. It has the heritage of the Allegorical Method. It portrays negligence of Spirit and Father (we should be Triune-centric, and also preach the whole counsel of God, some for examples, and so on). It will weaken theology because the other doctrines are forcefully replaced by the message of Grace. The redemptive-historical method in every sermon would starve the congregation from other aspects of God’s Attributes. Also, it will make the sermon predictable and superficial.

Pride

Did Saint Thomas come to India?

 

Apostle Thomas, Bartholomew, and the Origin of Christianity in India.

India has been widely known to the world centuries ago even before the birth of Lord Jesus Christ. The book of Esther mentions the name of India (Esther 1:1). Jews are believed to be present in India since 562 B.C. Strabo in 5 A.D. mentioned the trade between the Roman Empire and India.[1] Since Parthians were hostile to Rome, Greek traders tried to avoid Parthians and used the route of India, West Pakistan (modern Hyderabad), and others through the Red Sea and Arabian sea.[2] Moreover, India was famous for pepper, silks and others. Odoric wrote in 1324 that pepper is found only in India (Minibar), nowhere else in the world.[3] India has been a well-traveled place for centuries.

The coming of Christianity to India can be traced back to the Nestorian Church of Mesopotamia, part of Persia on the east side of Syria which is under the influence of Antioch, which in turn is under the influence of the Eastern Church (Greek-speaking Orthodox Byzantine Church).[4] There was a great connection between the Christians of India and the Church of Mesopotamia (Syria) from the earliest history. Geographically and for Trade and Commerce between India and the world, India is connected to the East.

One of the earliest assumptions that part of India has been evangelized (Christianized) is recorded in A.D. 196 (Bardaisan’s Dialogue of Faith).[5] India is believed to be evangelized by Apostle Thomas since 52 A.D. Tradition says that Apostle Thomas and Apostle Bartholomew preached the gospel in southern Arabia and parts of India. While Thomas is believed to remain and die in present India, Bartholomew left for other areas (without ministering in present India).[6] Tradition has that Apostle Thomas started from Jerusalem to Parthians to Medes to Persians to Arabia, and to India, then to China, and back to India and died.[7]

Acts of Thomas (180-230 A.D.) gives a lot of stories about the Apostle Thomas in India. Eusebius quoted Origen about the Apostle Thomas in India (185-230-254 A.D.) The Church of Edessa mentioned Thomas of India in 250 A.D[8].  Bishop Dudi of Basra is confirmed to visit India in 295-300 A.D. Hymns of Ephraim mentioned that Apostle Thomas died in India and his bone was in Edessa (306-373). All these give strong evidence about Apostle Thomas's ministry in India. Other sources like Marco Polo affirmed it. The Syrian Christians of India strongly continue to affirm it. The Portuguese when they came to India found them to be a long tradition.

Let’s evaluate it:

1.     The absence of the 1^st century writing about this makes scholars to doubt it.

2.     There were other Thomas in India.

3.      Some of the legendary and mythological writings found in Acts of Thomas and the traditional sites in India, and the beliefs of Syrian Christians concerning Thomas are ludicrous.

4.     India is a general name for lots of nations in the region, Apostle Thomas probably did not reach India.

5.     Other missionaries or Bartholomew could be the cause of the existence of the Syrian Church.

However, the absence of a 1^st-century account does not mean it is false. There are many things which first-century account did not acknowledge it. There were at least 2 important Thomas in India: Thomas Kinan (merchant) in 345 A.D[9], Bishop Thomas of Marga in 840 A.D[10]. Christians have been in India for more than a century even before they were born. Therefore, they cannot be confused with the Apostle Thomas. Regarding the ludicrous story, instead of rejecting it because of some accuracies in it, it is very much probable that at least the coming of Apostle Thomas, preaching, speared, and death happened. Concerning the objection that India is a general name, though true it is, writers, merchants, and traders knew India specifically. India had been widely known for its resources. Concerning the existence of the Syrian Church in India, there are no other traditions than the Apostle Thomas tradition[11].

Conclusion: The tradition that Malabar has cannot be disproven. The affirmation of some Church Fathers such as Ambrose, Gregory, Jerome and others indicate that (it is very probable) Apostle Thomas had indeed come to India. Granting this, India has a legacy of the Apostle. God’s grace reached India earlier than America or most of Europe. The church continues to grow (without complete destruction) even in all kinds of circumstances over the centuries. God’s grace has reached once more to India in the form of colonialism in the modern age. As of now, the church grows exponentially in its missionary duty which was not much there in the Syrian Christians. Our generation too needs missionary activities and even more!

---

[1] M.K. Kuriakose, History of Christianity in India: Source Materials, 1

[2] William G. Young, Handbook of Source Materials for Students of Church History

[3] M.K. Kuriakose, History of Christianity in India: Source Materials, 25

[4] C.B. Firth, An Introduction to Indian Church History

[5] Ibid, p.14

[6] Amr the son of Matthew in 1340 A.D. (M.K. Kuriakose, History of Christianity in India: Source Materials, 26)

[7] As documented by William G. Young (25) and C.B. Firth (p.3-4) in their books. William G. Young cites Eusebius for the traditions in the footnote.

[8] William G. Young, Handbook of Source Materials for Students of Church History, 212

[9] William G. Young, Handbook of Source Materials for Students of Church History, 409

[10] Ibid, 21

[11] C.B. Firth in p20 and footnotes mentions that Thomas tradition overwhelms Bartholomew tradition.

The Zeal of the Pioneering Missionaries In India

Years ago I was given 7 thick books to read and write a review for each book within a week. It was a tough assignment that every seminarian must not be surprised by. They were about Indian Church History. As I read them, I admired the zeal of the pioneering missionaries for winning souls for Christ and the sovereign work of God throughout history. This post is a reproduction of the reflection I had taken then– the evangelistic zeal of the earliest missionaries to India, which we ought to imitate for the spread of the gospel and to fulfil (obey) the Great commissions more effectively.

Three areas we need to imitate:

Firstly, their passion for the spread of the gospel irrespective of their sound or erroneous doctrine. Jesus was the greatest missionary. He was so passionate that He came to seek and save the lost (Luke 19:10). Before his earthly ministry was over He commissioned that all believers must spread the gospel in one way or the other way (Matthew 28:18-20). Therefore, all of us must be passionate to spread the gospel. The earliest missionaries to India were very passionate. Francis Xavier would visit the sick, travel to many places to spread the gospel. He would even go along the street calling for people. Menezes based on his belief that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ (which of course is false) would do anything to bring the Malabar under the Papacy. William Carey came all the way from England, despite the denials and rejection of him by his church to preach the gospel to India. He was not highly educated but was never intimidated.

Secondly, their compassion for the lost soul enduring hardships and sacrificing their lives. Ziegenbalg and his friend had to endure the bad relationship they had with the captain of the ship even before they reach India. William Carey, despite his poverty and England’s forbidding of missionaries, risked his life to enter India. Christian mission is never an easy way (cf. Matthew 7:13-14). They not only endured suffering but also had suffered in seeing their loved ones suffered. Carey’s wife and daughter died in India. What a heartbreak that must be! Carey did not turn back. He continued to work – harder and more fruitful.

Our Lord Jesus Himself says that we must count the cost of following Him (Luke 14:25-33). It is to put God’s way before anything. These people of history endured suffering and hardship. The reason they did what they did is because they were compassionate for the lost souls. Jesus wept out of compassion in Bethany (John 11:35). Scripture tells us many times about Jesus’ compassion for people (Matthew 9:36; 14:14; 20:34, etc.) We ought to do things because of our compassion. It is said that Carey would weep and weep for the lost sinners in his prayer. He helped abolish Sati. He established an institution to educate the people of India. Other missionaries gave away even their small salaries for the poor Christian. Why is our evangelism fruitless? Could it be because we have no compassion for the lost souls?

Thirdly, their reliance and confidence they have in God to fulfil (obey) the Great Commission. The reason and motivation for our evangelism is because God is interested in saving people (John 3:16-17; 1Timothy2:3-4). In fact, Jesus said that His sheepfold comprises all tongues, nations, and tribes. He predestined that the elect would be saved through the hearing of the gospel (Romans 10:17). Thus we do evangelism not because we have clever ideas or anything but that we trust God. No amount of hearing the gospel will save anybody; no amount of wise argument will convert anyone to Christ; no amount of gifts to poor people will lead them to Christ; if the Holy Spirit does not work (cf. John 3:8). We must rely on the Holy Spirit of God.

However, Jesus promised His disciples that He would be with them throughout the ends of the earth (Matthew 28:20). For us that is true – we have the Holy Spirit in us, we have the Bible, the word of God which is living and active, converting the soul (Hebrews 4:12; Psalm 19:7). Thus we do evangelism knowing the power of God and His faithfulness (1Corinthians1:18). We cannot do God’s work without trusting God’s faithfulness. We cannot have confidence in our ideas or anything except in His word. That’s what the earliest missionaries to India did. They rely on God and trust God. They were confident in God. William Carey said, “Expect Great Things from God, and Attempt Great Things for God.’ History has given the verdict that William Carey indeed expected great things from God and attempted great things for God.

Carey came to India from a group of people who did not believe much in evangelism. Carey because of his reliance and confidence in God came to India despite the British government’s disapproval. He lived in India by faith without much help or no help at all from England for his survival. He worked in a factory. Then he tutored himself in languages. He became a professor. He established institutions. He translated the Bible into many Indian languages. He did that because he relied on God and had confidence in the power of the Word of God. Are you trusting God? Are you convinced that “… in it (the gospel) is the power unto Salvation” (Rom 1:16-17)?

Let us learn from church history and imitate them. Paul told us to imitate others who are worthy of imitation (1Corinthians11:1). We do not need to imitate them in all areas (and rightly so) but we must imitate their passion for the spread of the gospel, their compassion for the lost sinners, and their reliance and confidence in God of Salvation. Amen!