Tseminyu to Kohima: A historic walk to remember (published in Morung Express, Nov. 29, 2021)

https://morungexpress.com/tseminyu-to-kohima-a-historic-walk-to-remember

The recent prayer walks within Tseminyu Town and walkathon from Tseminyu to Kohima by citizens of Tseminyu Sub Division and their well wishers were staged as democratic expressions of calling the Government of Nagaland to fulfill its responsibilities of protecting, preserving and promoting its people.  However, the question is whether any notable things can come out of these walks and marches.

Walks and marches have made significant contributions towards a just human society. Among boycotts, rides and sit-ins, walks and marches were popular form of non violent civil disobedience during the African American Civil Rights Movement in the United States in the mid 20th century. On August 27, 1963, thousands of participants walked and marched to Washington, DC in demands for civil and economic rights for African Americans. The next day, the iconic “I Have a Dream” was delivered by Martin Luther King, Jr, and the aftermath has become an inclusive and progressive history. In 1965, three marches from Selma to Montgomery (87 km) were staged to express the desire of African American citizens to exercise their constitutional right to vote, in defiance of segregationist repression. These Selma to Montgomery marches later became a landmark in the achievements of Civil Rights Movement and later the US Department of Justice would view the Voting Rights Act of 1965 as the most effective piece of rights legislation even enacted in the country.

Even in our own home turf India, the mass civil disobedience movement against the British India was triggered with the Dandi (Salt) March in 1930. The 1882 Salt Act gave the British a monopoly on the collection and manufacture of salt, levying heavy taxes in the process. This sort of monopolies and exploitations led the Indian National Congress to declare that it was “the inalienable right of the Indian people to have the freedom and to enjoy the fruits of their toil and the necessities of life.” To protest against this salt tax, Mohandas Karamch and Gandhi along with his followers started the Dandi March on March 12, 1930, from Sabarmati Ashram. The march lasted from March 12, 1930, to April 6, 1930. On April 5, 1930, Mahatma Gandhi along with his followers reached Dandi and there at a seashore he took a lump of salty mud and boiled it, thereby, producing illegal salt. This event led to more acts of similar non violent civil disobedience against the colonial British government. 

In the Bible, the greatest event which shaped the faith of Israelites in their God is the exodus event—i.e., their walk to freedom from Egypt to the Promised Land.  Despite much opposition from within themselves, Egypt and other foreign nations, Israelites walked. They walked in faith for 40 years and God chose to fulfill their yearnings. They walked around the city walls of Jericho for 13 times in 7 days, and God gave them victory. Peter walked on water because of his audacious faith in his Lord Jesus Christ. In the narratives of the walk to Emmaus, the faith and joy of the two disciples were restored by Jesus although they had walked with him without recognizing him. 

The above descriptions show that walks and marches are expressions of serious meditation and longings for fulfillment of faith and hope. They demonstrate living and audacious faith in the Sovereign Creator who is merciful and delivers timely justice. They are democratic symbolism of the desires for inalienable rights, privileges and necessities of life. As a result, they always stir minds and emotions for action whether in support or in opposition. Whatever may be the response, the desires and aspirations for these fundamental values will eventually overrun all oppositions and take its deserving place since they are natural and designed in eternity. Socially, this grand and noble vision is achieved eventually when racist, tribal and political hegemonic and marginalization nuances are surrendered for the sake of justice, equality, security and dignity. These same values and yearnings undergird Naga political movement and aspiration for Tseminyu District too. 

Now, the world has heard the plight of the citizens of Tseminyu Sub Division. Nagas have recognized and commend the notable demand for Tseminyu District. The case for Tseminyu District now rest in the power, will and prowess of the Government of Nagaland under the benevolent leadership of the Chief Minister, Neiphiu Rio. Similar to the marches mentioned earlier, the recent walks and marches must have definitely stirred either supportive empathy or antagonism and now it is only a matter of personal, sensible and kind will!  

History has shown us that there are times when the hearts of rulers become hardened towards the same people who had asked for justice and freedom as in the case of the Egyptian Pharaoh and Israelites. The same happened initially with the white segregationist government in the US and the colonial British when the African American and Indians begun their civil rights movements. On the contrary, in the narratives of Queen Esther and Nehemiah, the king’s cup bearer, we see that the Sovereign God can even use gentile rulers to have compassion and support the marginalized people. It was only a matter of heart and will of those in power and the same applies in our case today.

In “Naga Hills: Tseminyu was the fifth Administrative Hq.”, Nagaland Post, October 18, 2021, Nillo Rengma has already highlighted the prominence of Rengma Hills and Tseminyu Bench Court among Nagas which dated back to April 18, 1841, and 1948 respectively. He also underscored the contributions of Tseminyu citizens, Rengmas, in the pursuit and formation of Naga political identity since its genesis. Then citing the cases of seven districts in India which have only one Assembly seat he has strongly stated that there is “no reason” why Tseminyu should not be granted a district status.

God’s plan cannot be overshadowed nor thwarted by any force or entity. If not in our times, it will definitely be in God’s perfect time. In the case of Pharaoh and Israelites, on the tenth plague God had to eventually kill the first born of all Egyptians to move the heart of Pharaoh as it is written “woe to those who make unjust laws, to those who issue oppressive decrees” (Isaiah 10:1). Therefore, if not on the first demonstration, definitely for the tenth or the thirteenth times, or even forty years the aspirations for Tseminyu District will remain. History will tell us in the coming years whether the leadership today turned out to be like a cold hearted Pharaoh or the benefactor Boaz, from whom the royal line of Israelites like king David, king Solomon and Jesus himself was born.

Finally, “blessed are those who act justly, who always do what is right” (Psalms 106:3). Towards this end, I implore the benevolent authority of the Chief Minister of Nagaland to will and fulfill the aspirations for Tseminyu District. I plead our leader to join citizens of Tseminyu Sub Division and their well wishers for “a historic walk to remember” and for the well being of the general Nagas by declaring Tseminyu District before the auspicious year of the recently staged historic walkathon winds up.

(this same article has been also published in Nagaland Post, few days apart)

Nagas: A conglomeration of many tribes

  by Peter T. Kent, Published-Morung Express, January 8, 2018

http://morungexpress.com/nagas-conglomeration-many-tribes/

This article is a personal reflection triggered by Dr Visier Sanyu’s writings for all right thinking Nagas. On January 4, 2018, I came across Dr Sanyu’s article, “Naga: A Nation of Peoples”, published by the Morung Express and I told myself, “hey I have known him as a dynamic and passionate gentleman”. Back in 2006, when I was down with dengue fever in one refugee camp along the Thai-Burma border, Dr Sanyu happen to visit the same camp and the institution where I was teaching along with two Naga volunteers. I met him for the first time and after learning about our situation he gave his assurance to raise funds for our personal necessities. Through him, I and two of my Naga colleagues were greatly helped by his friends from Australia. 

Today as I go through his thoughts, I see him not only as a renowned historian but also a visionary and passionate Naga patriot who would not give up the hope of seeing a “Naga: A Nation of peoples” in history. Dr Sanyu underlines this historical possibility only “when India is ready” to discuss about the issue of Naga sovereignty. He begins his article stating that “Naga Nation is an imagined creation, a historical process and a historical necessity”. Then, he emphasizes on the notion of “Nagas Without Borders” by saying that “Naga ancestral land belongs to the Nagas and to no one else. We have the right to live together with our own laws and our own culture. We have the right to inherit our ancestral land.” Finally he ends quoting T. Sakhrie, the then General Secretary of National Council, “If I were to choose a country it would be Nagaland, my fair Nagaland, again and again.” 

This sort of deep seated thoughts churned out from his vast readings, wide interactions with great personalities from both local and global contexts, and from his own personal experiences have no doubt stirred up the flame of Naga patriotism even to a simple soul like mine. I believe the same flame of Naga patriotism will definitely be ignited within any Naga soul if only they sincerely go through his article. On a wider scale, to stir up and keep this flame burning, Nagas are looking forward for the first ever “Naga Day” on January 10, under the theme “Nagas Without Border”, anticipating that this would serve as an “opportunity to come in solidarity and stand together as one people”.

 In the midst of moral brokenness and narrow sectarianisms which have become rampant among Nagas in almost all social groups, Dr Sanyu’s article and the FNR’s call for “Naga Day” is timely and necessary to realign all Nagas into the big picture of being, first and foremost, a Naga. I pray that this Day would not only mark an event when we merely “stand” together as groups of indifferent peoples but instead gather as one true Naga people who reaffirm and recommit to “live” as “one people” irrespective of time, space and situation.

Now having mentioned my motive, it would be hypocrisy if we make “one people” a precondition of our Naga political aspiration. The given political situation entails us to live within the Indian government but this need not limit us to live as “one people”. Our essence of oneness essentially springs from who we are historically and culturally. This is the foundational reason of our Naga political movement and the theme “Nagas Without Borders”. This is the reason why we have been demanding Indian government to respect our uniqueness as “one people”.

 However, if we fail to respect each other among ourselves, who on earth would care to respect us? If we practice any forms of political and cultural hegemony, why shouldn’t other larger and powerful nation impose themselves on us? Therefore, as Nagas cry for justice from the Indian government, we need to introspect whether we have been a people who practices justice, if not to others, but atleast among ourselves.

The recent cries of the Chang Khulie Setshang (CKS) to exclude their Chingmei Range villages from the newly created Noklak District and the cries of the Rengma Hoho to upgrade Tseminyu Sub-Division (ref. “Rengma Hoho justifies district demand”, published by Morung Express, January 4, 2018) only shows the indifference and apathy of our own Naga brethrens who have been given the political power to shepherd and govern. If there is indifference, apathy and hegemonic attitude towards each other, how then shall we envision the idea of “one people”? If we cannot live with dignity by way of respecting each other’s distinctive Naga sub-cultures and histories, how then shall we live as a Naga family? If we cannot live as a “nation” within the Indian Union, how then shall we live as a sovereign nation? Unlike T. Sakhrie, surely I cannot choose Nagaland as my country if Nagaland undermines my Naga sub-cultural identity and being.

 The idea of communities and nationhood, and likewise, the carving of administrative blocks, is only an imagined creation which arises out of historical processes and historical necessities. So as Nagas aspire for the recognition of this creation with the Indian Goverment, Nagas also need to do justice, now and even in the future, in creating administrative blocks by respecting the identity and sentiments of communities as this would eventually form the backbone of our identity and existence. Only then we would not merely “stand” but “live” as “one people” not only on Naga Day but also throughout Naga history. Surely then, all generations of Nagas would gracefully and proudly choose Nagaland as their beloved country.

Guide to electing our representatives to authority

Published by Morung Express, August 26, 2017
http://morungexpress.com/guide-electing-representatives-authority/

Confused on how to exercise your franchise as a Christian? Go through this article!!! :)

Text: Romans 13:1-7 and 1 Peter 2:13-17

God has given one great responsibility to each of us and that is the freedom and right to select and appoint our leaders! This is a divine responsibility! In the Bible, often times we see that God directly appointed leaders. However we also find that God also appointed leaders through the choices of his people like Moses appointing leaders to work with him in the wilderness (Deuteronomy 1:9-18) or Paul and Barnabas appointing elders in the church (Acts 14:23) based on certain spiritual and leadership qualifications.

Similarly, God has also shared His divine role with us to appoint leaders in the affairs of the world. Therefore, appointment of leaders whether through selection or election needs to be done prayerfully if we long to see God’s justice and righteousness, and goodness and mercies overflowing in our world.

Apostles Paul (Romans 13: 1-7) and Peter (1 Peter 2: 13-17) clearly give the model of God’s kingdom politics as they underline the reasons on who establishes governing authorities and why they were established. The apostles also clearly teach why and how citizens need to relate with the authorities. These same rationales can be used as the guiding principles to form political party and chart political manifesto. However our concern here is to help citizens to make realistic and well informed choices as they prayerfully consider in electing their representatives.

    i.        The first principle is based on righteousness and justice. Who and which political party esteem and would execute truth and fairness in all areas of life like history, culture, economy, environment, healthy, education, religion, society, politics and governance?

     ii.      The second principle is about responsible freedom. Who and which political party esteem and would be able to protect and promote responsible freedom?

    iii.    The third principle is mutual respect. Who and which political party esteem and would be able to protect and promote mutual respect in the midst of diversities?

    iv.    The fourth principle is the fraternity of believers. Who and which political party esteems and would be able to protect and promote the freedom of propagation of faith?

    v.      The fifth principle is the ‘fear of God’. Who and which political party esteems and would be able to protect and promote the notion and action of being accountable to God?

    vi.    The sixth principle is about ‘honouring the king’. Who and which political party would be able to self respect their given authority and execute their responsibility with integrity?

The opportunity to elect leaders to a position which has been instituted by God is a great responsibility! Therefore all our value formations, decisions and actions need to be “for the Lord’s sake”. So there is the urgency for every citizen to prayerfully elect their representatives based on the above principles and not for any other self-centered motives. This is our mission! This is the key to usher in God’s kingdom politics here on earth in our own nation and constituencies! If not, people who cast their votes based on narrow self centered interests are the agents of wickedness and they are responsible for our broken and corrupted world! The authority is in our hands! If each one of us can be the change for the world we yearn to see, then our future is worth venturing into! 

LEAH: The unfavoured lady who won God’s favour

Bible references: Genesis 29:1-35; 30:1-21

Narrative:

Leah was the elder daughter of Laban and she had a younger sister named Rachel. Her name (in Hebrew le’ah; Greek leia) literally means “weary” or “dull”. Unlike her sister Rachel who was beautiful, Leah did not have those lustrous and glowing eyes which were considered as prominent aspect of female beauty (Gen. 29:17). So, Leah was probably a simple and ordinary woman.

Leah became Jacob’s wife due to her father’s trick on Jacob. Laban had deceived Jacob by taking advantage of the oriental custom of heavily veiling the prospective bride by saying that it was against their custom to first give away the younger daughters for marriage (Gen. 29:21-26). In this way, Leah began her married life as the monopolized, unintended and unloved wife (Gen. 29:30).

Despite being treated unfairly by her husband and Rachel, God had His own greater plans for her (Gen. 29:30-31). Leah was regarded lowly, yet she remained faithful to God and her husband by enduring all ill treatments (Gen. 29:32-34; 30:10-21). At some point of time, Leah was even deprived of her husband’s intimacy (Gen. 30:15-16). So she really yearned for her husband’s love and attention.

Leah earnestly prayed to God to show her mercy and vindicate her. Then, God showered His mercies and blessings to Leah in great measures. Leah gave birth to six sons named Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, and a daughter named Dinah. Then, she thought that her husband would begin to love her more because God had blessed her with seven children. Up to this time, Rachel had not even given birth to any child.

Leah was always committed to secure her husband’s love and attention. She yearned for her husband’s unbiased care. So, when Rachel cunningly resorted to use her maid Bilhah to bear two children for her husband Jacob (Gen. 30:6-7), Leah was not to be outdone. Leah also used the same method to win her husband’s favour by using her maid Zilpah to give birth to Gad and Asher for her husband (Gen. 30:9-13).

However, Leah hardly received any of her husband’s true love. Even in their journey to her husband’s land, Leah was told to be infront of Rachel when they were preparing to meet Jacob’s brother, Esua (Gen. 33.2). This arrangement was strategic because in case Esau sought to take revenge, then Leah would have to first face Esau’s fury while providing time to save Rachel. Even so, Leah faithfully accompanied Jacob into his father’s land in Canaan. Later, she died before her family moved into Egypt and she was buried at Machpelah where her husband’s parents and grandparents were buried (Gen. 49:29-31).

Leah’s life was a story of commitment, dedication and unwavering love to her God and husband despite the harsh realities of being the monopolized and unexpected bride, unfavoured, ill treated and dull looking wife. Even though Leah’s simple and ordinary appearance made her the sidelined wife, she remained faithful and committed to God and her husband. God is a just and merciful God who would not allow men’s biased love, cunning and worldly beauty to thwart His sovereign plan. So, in the later course of Israel’s history, we eventually find that god honoured her prayers and life with great descendants. Personalities like Moses, their greatest prophet and leader, was born from the family of Levi (Exodus 2:1-10), and the King David and the Messiah, Jesus Christ, were born from the family of Judah (Matthew 1:1-2). They were the descendants of Jacob and Leah!

Lessons for Reflections:

1.      Leah was a dull, simple and ordinary woman. Her father Laban monopolized her to be the unintended bride of Jacob. The result was that she was neither favoured nor loved but ill treated. Yet, God had His own purpose in all these situations of human monopoly, deceit, biases and ill treatments. Then, God gradually reveals and unfolds His plans through committed and faithful children. Similarly, a woman may end up marrying through monopoly and unwillingness, yet if she remains faithful and committed to God and her newly wedded family, God will definitely bless her and her children.

2.      God is not put off by our dull, simple and ordinary physique and personalities. Rather He delights in our sincere and unwavering commitment and faith in Him and His plans.

3.      God is just, merciful and sovereign! God honoured Leah’s unwavering faith and committed life with descendants who became the greatest personalities in both the histories of Israel and Christianity. Moses, King David and Jesus Christ were born from the line of Jacob and Leah.

Reference Books:

1.      Easton Dictionary, Bible Works CD-ROM

2.      Fausset Dictionary, Bible Works CD-ROM

ISBE Encyclopedia, Bible Works CD-ROM

MIRIAM: The lovely guardian sister who was later destroyed due to her flawed character

MIRIAM

Bible References-      Exodus 15: 20,12; Numbers 12: 1-15; 20: 1; 26:56

                                    Deuteronomy 24: 9; Micah 6:4

Narrative:

Miriam was the eldest child of Amram and Jochebed and the sister of Aaron and Moses. She had godly parents and so she grew up to be loyal to God and her people. Her name variedly means ‘a drop of the sea’, ‘the Lady of the sea’, ‘bitterness’ or ‘rebellion’.  

Miriam lived in Egypt when the Israelites were oppressed by the Egyptian kings. However, despite oppressions, discriminations, exploitation and suppressions in all areas of their Hebrew lives by the Egyptians, Miriam played a very important role in the history of the deliverance of Israel.

When Miriam was around 8-10 years old, Pharaoh—the king of Egypt—commanded all the Hebrew male babies to be drowned in the river Nile. So Miriam’s mother hid her son for three months and when she could hide him no longer, she put her son in a basket and placed it among the reeds in a river bank. Miriam carefully hid herself in a distance to observe what would happen. Then, when Pharaoh’s daughter came to the river to bathe and found the baby boy and took him, Miriam risked and seized the opportunity to step forward and approach the puzzled princess. Appearing to be curious, Miriam innocently asked the princess whether she needs a Hebrew nurse to take care of the baby. The princess agreed and even offered to give the nurse her wage. So, Miriam went and brought her mother to be the nurse and, thus, saved her baby brother—who, then, would liberate the Hebrews from the Egyptians’ bondage.

Miriam led the joyous acclamation of the multitude when Pharaoh allowed the Hebrews to go out of Egypt after the ten devastating plagues. She used her timbrel and led the women in singing: “Sing ye to the Lord, for He had triumphed gloriously, the horse and his rider hath He thrown into the sea” (Exd. 15:21). So along with her brother Moses’ song, Miriam’s song has also been referred to as one of the oldest National Song in Hebrew Literature and one of the finest. Being gifted as a poet and prophetess, and also because of her leadership qualities, she eventually became an ideal female leader for the Hebrew women. Miriam remained unmarried which was also a very rare thing to do during those days when marriage was considered to be the glory of womanhood.  

However, despite all her qualities as a poet, prophetess and leader, which allowed her to serve God along with her brothers Aaron and Moses in leading their people, she failed in her character. Pride, jealousy and competition crept into her life and, along with her brother Aaron, she challenged the leadership of her brother Moses, whom God had chosen, by sarcastically saying: “Has the Lord spoken Through Moses?  Has He not spoken through us also” (Num. 12:1-2). Then God spoke to reaffirm Moses’ leadership saying, “My servant Moses is not so. With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently and not in dark speeches.” Such was God’s elective sovereignty, and so Miriam’s sin was grievous because she had rebelled against what God had spoken when she questioned Moses’ leadership.

The rebellious Miriam and Aaron were reprimanded by God for speaking against His honored servant—Moses. So, God’s anger was kindled against them and Miriam, the chief instigator, was struck with leprosy. Even so, Moses prayed for his sister Miriam and, after her separation from the camp for 7 days, she was healed of her leprosy. Miriam repented but her strength was broken and God took back the gift of prophecy from her. Like most of the Hebrews who came out from Egypt, Miriam also could not enter the Promised Land because of her sin. She died before the entrance to Canaan at the age of 130 and was buried in Kadesh-Barnea where the Israelites mourned for her for around 30 days. She was given a costly funeral and buried on the Mountain of Zin. True to her symbolism with water, after her death, God opened spring of abundant water for the people, called Meribah.

Summary points:

1.      The young Miriam was innocent and devoted, protective and caring, courageous and takes up risks, careful and wise, obedient and exhibited great leadership qualities. All these qualities helped her to lay the foundation for the liberation of Israel.

2.      She remained unmarried and devoted her life in God’s service and her people as a poet, prophetess and leader. These qualities helped her to serve her people in the praise and worship of their LORD and also in supplementary leadership roles.

3.      Despite her great qualities, she had a major spiritual and character flaw when she was driven by pride and jealousy. She began to claim equality with Moses, who was the chief leader.

4.      God punished Miriam for her rebellion and although she was later forgiven, God withdrew His grace and strength from her life. She could not live to see the Promised Land.

Lessons for reflection:

1.      We can nurture our young daughters to be like Miriam who was innocent and devoted, protective and caring, courageous and takes up risks, careful and wise, obedient and exhibited leadership qualities.

2.      Single women may devote their lives in God’s service and in serving people in praise and adoration of the LORD and in other leadership roles.

3.      Women in leadership roles or in any other forms of service should guard their hearts from negative comparisons, being discontented, proud and jealously desiring a higher place of honour which another holds.

4.      Small acts of service and wise words can do wonders beyond our imaginations if they are done with pure and loving motives, and courageously and wisely for God’s glory.

5.      God is always sovereign. He is merciful and gracious and yet He is also a just God. So as long as we remain humble under His grace, He lifts us up beyond our imagination and abilities but if we try to rebel and challenge His sovereignty He will punish us and reduce us to nothing.

             

Reference

1. The Pulpit Commentary.
2. E. Thelma Johnson. Women of the Bible.  Delhi: Published by ISPCK, 2000.



Herbert Lockyer.  All the women of the Bible. Grand Rapids Michigan: Zondervan, 1967.

Eve

EVE

Bible sü nrün: Binzen 2-4; II Kor. 11:3; I Tim. 2:13, 14

Eve Rüla:

Eve le kazünyu tenugi keritsingi. A-le ntsenyu mvüe menyüginyu thyümvü. Sunggigü le Adam thyü pe no zhü tin kela ka Adam nyikhon rü pe Eve zürhen shü. Ibrinyu khwe ki “Eve” le hawwah, a-kon le “kerhün, rhünkebin”. Tsühontse, Eve kon le “kerhün jvügi” nmvüe “rhünkebinyu aphu jvügi”.

Lo Adam le Sunggigü le zürhen keshü tenugi zen tho pe Eve thyü shü kechamvüle tsügi le rhünkebinyu aphu jvügi genyu. Tson-o Eve le Adam nü thyülo-o Cain, Abel lo Seth nnyü shü (Bin. 4:1-2, 25).

Sunggigü le Eve zürhen keshü kon yatselo tsugi no Adam “kechegi” thyü nrün genyu. Adam nyikhon rü pe Eve thyü keshü kon yatselo tsugi no Adam zen kekhonisa, kenyüshasa lo kengü nme thyüo kechye kenono-o Sunggigü kendo lo zenkechwi thyü nrün genyu.

Eve genyu Adam le a-kenyu lo a-sherhun lo ai Eve tenyen gwasa kethyü nme gwenkho ka Eve genyu Adam no Sunggigü johokeshü gwünrho la-o mu la. Sunngigü le au no Eden chwi lvü nyu terasha nme tyünya lo tse zo shü ai Eve le a-kendo kerüchün thyüo a-npvü a-kenyü yhüdyü füo keseme peri tedo nyu chye kela ka Adam kono kemu thyü la (Bin. 3).

Tsonkela ka Sunggigü le Eve jünkera kethyü ka Sunggigü kendo keyhun bin—Eden chwi, nyu Eve lo Adam hvü hu la, lo Eve no nyu kezen gwünkho ka kenjün thyü ti tse la. Ai sidyu ki Eve tswinpe no peri pe kede ti tse Sunggigü le zo shü (Bin. 3:15).

Eve le Sunggigü kendo lo johokeshü khwenyu mvüo Sunggigü nyu kekhu chünlo. Adam kechye pe Sunggigü zenkechwi thyü mvüo Adam seme pe Sunggigü kendo gwünrho la. Sunggigü le Eve le thyü zü kela chün pe tsü ai shwinkenjünyu Eve le nnyukeshü tswipe no peri so kvü ti tse joho shü. Eve le kemu thyü la-o kemu chün hyulo ai Sunggigü shwikenjün nyu tsinpe nnyun pe Sunggigü kendo lo kenikelo tho thyü lo kewa yhusinlo.

Rüchün sini shü mvü lo keshvü jokon dan:

1.      Eve no Adam zen kekhonisa, kenyüshasa lo kengü nme thyüo Adam kechye kenono-o Sunggigü kendo lo zenkechwi thyü nrün genyu Sunggigü le zürhen shü. Tsühontse tenuginyu dan le rüchün zin bin mvü lo keshvü jokon kedatsin nme yatselo anyugun no pechye nme zen kekhonisa, kenyüshasa lo kengü nme thyüo tsugü  kechye kenono-o Sunggigü kendo lo zenkechwi thyü nrün genyu anyugun zürhen shü le tsu shabin mvü lo shvü.

2.      Eve le a-kendo kerüchün thyüo a-npvü a-kenyü yhüdyü füo keseme peri tedo nyu chye kela ka Adam kono kemu thyü la. Tsuhontse tenuginyu nmeme tsekethyü kehi ketenyen nyu Sunggigü johokeshü nyu binzin mvü lo shvü kechamvüle nyuchye ka nnpvü nkenyü yhüdyü füo Sunggigü johokeshü nyu binmvü la hu yo, nzen-o yhun kebinyu kono kemu nyu chyü la hu.

3.      Sunggigü le shwinjün lo jünkera shü ke hu gü! Sunggigü le Eve kemu chün pe tsüla ai tsügi no kenikelo tho thyü sinilo kewa shwikenjün pe tsügi tsüsini shü. Tsühontse nyukezen gwünkho ka kenjün thyü kehu tsü no tenugi le Sunggigü kendo gwünrho kela tsin zin hu mvü lo shvü. Lo ntsenyu nyun lo yatselo Sunggigü shwinkenjün nyu kenikelo tho thyülo kewa tson tsügenyu Sunggigü cheno zin hu mvü lo shvü.

4.      Sunggigü le Eve no kenikelo tho thyü sinilo kewa genyu a-gen nyhun chwikeryü nme no keseme so kvü ti tse joshü. Tsühontse, tenuginyu dikho le gwenkho paha ka Sunggigü kendo nyu binmvü-o kemu thyü-o yhun ryü la yo, Sunggigü le shwikenjün pe anyugün tsü shü-o anyugün gen yhunchwikeryü nyu no a-kendo thyü sinilo kehu sha lo.

Lesü nri kelo dan:

 T.C. Mitchell, “Eve,” New Bible Dictionary. 2^nd edition, eds. J.D. Douglas, N. Hillyer, F.F. Bruce et al. Secunderabad: OM.

Brewster Porcella, “Eve,” New International Bible Dictionary. Eds. J.D. Douglas, Merrill C. Tenney et al. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1987.

Herbert Lockyer. All the Women of the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1967.

Anna, Sidyükeshagi

ANNA SIDYUKESHAGI

Bible sü nrün: Luke 2:36-38

Anna Rüla:

Anna le Phanuel nyugi lo Phanuel le Asher senye nyu nme. Asher le Jacob nyu mi tetse gü. Lo Asher jvü le Zilpha, Leah gogi (Bin. 30:13). Ahser senye dan le Israelnyu rajaphen teso ki yhun kehu nyu. Tsühontse, Israelnyu rakaphen teso gü le senye kachanyu ben ka chye kela ka, Anna kaminyu le Israelnyu rajaphen tesin gü ki kela nshyeryü la. Tson-o anyugun le Judahnyu kazünyu, Jerüsalem nyu yhun tinla.

Senye kachanyu hensin nyu binthon sa kela genyu, Israelnyu le politiks, shübon jvü, kenya, katse lowa lo nyünyu tho aphu nyu kemeni lo kenjü thyü sa tse yhun hü. Hiwhünkho ka, Israelnyu aphu le Sunggigü le nduka zo pe binkenjü Messiah gü tsü nrin sa hü. Tsühontse, Anna ko Judahnyu ketenyen tenugi nme thyü kebin hontse, a-ko kehi nyu rhinhikelogü lo rhinhikelo jon tsü nrin sa hü.

Asher senye tenunyu dan le zewa sa lo kopero wasa kethyü genyu anyugun tenugi dan lo rajanyu lo peshü kedanyu zen-o kalü hü. Asher senye tenunyu dan thojvü kewa higenyu, Anna ko kopero-o ketsin jo dan sha lo kerüshvü tho dan sha-o thyü hü.

Tsühontse, Joseph lo Mary hvü le Jisü zen-o Jerusalem kerüshvü ka nyu ryü kethyü ka, Anna le kethenyu nme thyü kerüshvü ka nyu bin. Higwenkho yatselo, Anna le a-nyepvü zen-o chen tsenyü yhunlo lo chen hentetse pezi maginyu thyü-o yhun bin kela gwünkho. Tsuhontse, Anna le, maginyu thyü kelo siki thatho kecha aphu khelao Jerusalem kerüshvü ka nyu bin-o Israelnyu rhinhinkelo jon genyu gwünkho lo lo kehi thyü hü.

Maginyu nme thyü lo peshü sala ai Anna le peshünyu ketenyennyu nme thyü-o sidyü jo pe kerüshvü ka nyu temi senyu le ryüyo tsünyu ka jün zo lo senthyü hü. Anna le kerüshvü ka nyu nmvüe kerüshvü ka tikho ka a-kebin tsen le bin kechanmvü le Anna le keben kezen gwünkho aphu nyu kerüshvü ka nyu bin hü. Hika shalo kewa yatselo Anna le temi le a-so kechye shü kehü dan tsü sen-o lotho dan tsü thyü hü.

Hihontse, Anna le kerüshvü ka nyu binzin kehü nme thyü hü. Tsügenyu, a-le kerüshvü ka nyu Joseph lo Mary le ryü kethyü gwünkho tsü gwünzü lo keho tsüle bin. Joseph lo Mary hvü le nyugü Jisü zen kerüshvü ka nyu Simeon teno kethyü ka Anna ko whütse tsü nyu binlo. Tsüka Simeon le Sunggigü shweo kehi thyü shü

“Npugü, nle ntsoka we njo nyu zo kenjü hontse, ngogü hi no a-nyun bwen-o tin kelo thyü lo ta. Kechamvule ale a npvü ayhutyü pe Nle kenikelo tho thyü keshü hyukela genyu, lo kenekelo tho tsüle Nle temi aphu mhundyü ka thyü shü la so, tsüno keben nme thyüo Juda kemvunyu tesha keshü lo tsüno ntemi Israelnyu zan kechwi thyü ti.” (Luke 2:29-32)

Ketenyen sidyü keshanyu tenugi thyü kebin hontse, Anna ko whütse Jisü tsü le zo pe binkenjü Messiahgü le tse shalo. Anna, jokon le “shwikenjün”. Tsühontse, a-zan hontse, Anna le Sunggugü shwinkenjün yhü kelo genyu nyu Sunggigü shwe hü. Anna le kehi thyü kebin hontse Sunggigü le zo pe binkenjü rhinhikelo lo kenikelo tho dan Jisü genyu bin-o a-keyhun gwünkho ka thyü penkeshü genyu Anna le Sunngigü shwe hü. Ai, Anna le a-npvü Sunggigü gen shyekerhün thyü la mvu. Sidyü jokezogü Isaiah (Isaiah 52:9) le zokeshü hontse, Anna le shyekerhun thyü-o Jerusalem kerushvü kanyu lo nyida nyu Messiahgü nrin-o khwen kebinyu dan ka Sunggigü le Jisü gen bin-o kenikelo tho binzen keshü tho dan zo hü.

Rüchün sini shü mvü lo keshvü jokon dan:

1.      Anna le a-keyhun pe rhinhikelo jon genyu kehi kekhen thyü hü. Anna hontse, maginyu nmvue ketenyenyu lihigue Sunggigü no nshenhe rhinhi shülo tse kehi kekhen thyü lowa.

2.      Sunggigü le johokeshü rhinhishü nrün jon le a-khonni sa la le tse Anna le jün zo lo senthyü hü. Ketenyenyu lihigue kazü tho dan thyü khe kela siki, a-kehyun aphu pe Sunggigü tsüo A-le rhinhikeshü tho dan jün zo lo senthyüo kechye kenono lotho dan thyü lowa.

3.      Anna le nyugü Jisü yhüshü nyeyhunyu tsüle zope binkenjün Messiahgü le tse shalo lo nrin kebin rhinhikelo jon thyü penlo so tse shalo. Tsühontse, ketenyenyu le peripero bin-o Sunggigü whünkho lo a-tho dan sha hü mvu lo shvü.

4.      Sunggigü shwikenjün tho kegwa dan genyu chenkeno keshwe pe Sunggigü tsü mvulo shvü lo chenkeno keshwe sika a-tho kegwa dan jün zo mvu lo shvü.

Lesü nri kelo dan:

1.      Fausset Dictionary, Bible Works CD-ROM

2.      ISBE Encyclopedia, Bible Works CD-ROM

3.      Matthew Henry Commentary, Bible Works CD-ROM

4.      Buttrick, George Arthur and others. The Interpreter’s Bible Vol. 8. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1952.

5.      Holland, John. Word Biblical Commentary. Vol. 35 A. Luke 1-9:20. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2000.