Friday, June 29, 2012

Thuthang Ngan Tikah Theih Tulmi pawl



Media Workshop Tuahsuak
By Jeremiah
19 June 2012

KUALA LUMPUR (Malaysia) : International news agency hmin thang zet AFP ih tuan rero lai Julia ih ra zirh mi Media Workshop cu MAC tlawng ah colhni sun (17 June) ah tuah a si. A ra kaitu minung 18 cun kan hlawkpi nasa. Julia cun theihkauhnak tampi cem in leitlun media thu a phunphun a zirh.
A zirh mi tampi lak ah kan zate hrang ih cin hngal ding thil tha pawl cu a hnuai lam ih tarlang mi hi an si.
1)      Midia a phunphun (TV, Radio, Newspaper, News agency, Magazine) hrang ca ngan sak dan ding a bangawk lo zet ruangah mai tui mi theih fiang ih a tul mi zir ding.
2)      Professional journalist pakhat si thei ding cun hmin nei ve tawk news agency (or) newspaper ah mai ngan mi article va hmuh leh va zuar, cu mi hmang in hnatuan hawl.
3)      Freelance writer dinhmun in thu hla tha zet ngan ih news agency hnen ih va zuar.
4)      Thulu ngan tikah tawifel thei bik ih ngan ding. Mi in siar hai seh ti thinlung vek men in a sung thu si lo mi Thulu ih hmang loh ding.
5)      News ngan tikah a thupi bik a si mi paragraph (or) tlar hmaisa bik ah (Who? What? Where? When? Why?) ti mi hmangin kim fel thei bik in ngan ding.
6)      Tlar hmaisa lam ih ngan lang zo mi thu (facts pawl) ngan nawn sal loh ding.
7)      News kan ngan tik ah a si vek vial ih ngan ding, mai ruahnak leh zum dan telh hrimhrim loh ding.
8)      News pakhat na ngan mi thu ah na ruahnak le hmuh dan ngan na duh a si le Opinion section ah ngan ding (mai news ngan mi kar lak ah ngan loh ding tinak).
9)      Thu buai/buainak thuthang ngan tik ah, leh lam veve ih sim dan thei dingih zuam  leh an sim veve dan vek in tan bul nei lo ih ngan lang ding.
10)   News ngan tikah thu dik cekci/a tongtu ih tong suak mi cekci vek ih ngan ding, tan lam nei ih ngan loh ding, mi in ngan hram hlah an ti mi upat tihzah thiam ding, thu dik ziktluak si lo mi ngan loh ding (khing awk theih cih a si).
11)   Mi ngan cia media/online/news agency ih ca copy & paste tuah lo ding. Thu laknak ih hmang kan duh a si le kan thuhram laknak ngan lang ding, mai tongkam ten ngan kir sal ding (never copy & paste!).
12)   Tong dang ta news/ca kan let tik ah a cang thei tawkin an ngan vek ih thlun (a thu feh dan ah) leh a san nai  thei bik ih let ding.
A par ih tarlang mi pawl hi thu tampi kan zir mi lak ih thu malte vial a si lai!!! Julia ih in zem mi teaching note a duhduh cun ccyimalaysia@gmail.com ah email in cah a theih. 2:30pm – 5 :15 pm tiang thu zirnak leh thu suhnak thawn hi Media Workshop cu kan hlawkpi tlang zet a si.  


Salai Jeremiah
KL, Malaysia



Thursday, June 28, 2012

Why does God give us freedom to choose?





Why is there so much suffering in the world?

How would a woman feel if a man pointed a gun at her and said, “Will you marry me? If you don’t, I will kill you!”

Sounds romantic, doesn’t it? Many people think that is what God is like. “You better love me or else I will make you suffer!”

This picture of God is wrong! He truly loves us. And genuine love always gives freedom. God says,

“If you want to live with Me, I promise, you will experience love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, faithfulness, and self-control.”

“If you persistently choose evil, you will experience much pain and suffering as a natural consequence. If you persist in that lifestyle, you will eventually hate me. In fact, you will come to the point that you would rather die than live in my presence. Out of love for you, I will honor your choice, for I will never force myself upon you.”

On the other hand, Satan says, “If you want to learn about evil, you will have so much fun and pleasure, you will be glad you did. Any pain or suffering will be worth it. And I promise you, you will not die!”






10 Real Reasons Pastors Quit Too Soon



Pastor pawlin an hnatuan tuanten an bansannak thu pa hra
A lettu: Rev. Hre Mang
 
by Tim Peters

Tim Peters in www.churchleaders.com ah suahmi cahram a ngan mi asi. A kimcang siar duhtu in mirang in siar ding a hnuai ah a um. A sungthu pawl hi *Statistics from Pastoral Care Inc. in an hmuhsuahmi pawl parah hngat aw in cangantu in a ngan mi as. 

Nangteh na umnak kawhhran pastor pawl phurrit maw na si, bawmtu tha na si, na umnak kawhhran pastor in a hnuailam thu pawl hi a hmuhtawnmi le tuar rero tla asi pang maw, ziangtin pastor pawl Pathian fialmi hnatuan an tuansuak famkim thei ding ti ruahnak in petu dingah American ramah pastor 1700 hnakih tamin an hnatuan an cawlhsannak thu hrampi pawl zoh hnik uhsi.

Hminsin: “Theihtha” timi pawl hi betcawp mi an si.

Over 1,700 pastors leave the ministry every month. Kumkhat sungah kawhhran thar 4,000 tluk din asi ih kawhhran (biak inn) 7000 tlukkhar asi. Ziangthu ruangah pastor tampi in an hnatuan tuanten an cawlhsan, ziangruangah biak inn 7000 kumtin khar asi? A hnuai lam pawl hi thu tlangpi khaikhawm, Pastor pawl hmuhtawnmi ihsin ngansuah mi asi.

  1. Thanau nak (Discouragement).
Pastor 100 ah 50 (50%) tluk cu an hnatuan hi cang thei sehla suahsan, cawlhsan an duh ringring ti asi. Sawiselnak hi a tam tuk ih bawmtu, lawmnak, a mal tuk. Voi 15 sawiselnak ah voi 1 tluk lawmnak pastor pawl in an tawng. Pastor lawmnak cu a ziamral lohli nan an sawiselnak cu a tang ringring. Cutin sawiselnak tawm lakah kawhhran member pawl khawm paih nawn loin biak inn a lawng vivo tikah pastor tampi in anmah riangri an hnatuan an cawlhsan theu.

Theihtha:
Pastor:Ziangvek sawiselnak na tawng tla le an lo sawiselnak ih lethra in na tuahmi a tha sawn ringring asi.
Mipi: Thlarau rawl a lo cawm rero tu, rawl a lo barh rerotu ih kut cu na keu rero ding maw? Na pastor pa na bawm tikah, milai na bawm si loin Pathian na duhdawtnak, na tihzahnak na langter mi asi.

  1. An palh theu (Failure)
100 ah 70 (70%) pastor pawl hi pastor an tuan thawk hnakin an tuan hnu ah anmah le anmah hi an thiam aw lo, hlawhtling lo ah an ruat awaw. Pastor dang, kawhhran dang pawl thawn an khaikhawm theu tikah an beidawng theu.

Theihtha:
Pastor: Tahthim awknak in a suahpi theu mi thil pahnih cu i) Midang hnakin ka thacuang tiah porh awknak, ii) asilole, midang tluk in ka hlawhtling lo, ka tling lo tiah mahlemah namthlak awknak asi.
Mipi: Pastor pawl hi minung ih hnatuan pekmi an silo. Pathian kawhnak vekin Pathian hnatuan fial mi an si. Pastor pakhat le pakhat tahthim theih an silo. Anmah le hnatuan a dang cio.

  1. A fal in um (Loneliness)
100 ah 70 (70%) pastor pawl in rualpi tha zet tiah an kawh theih mi rualpi nei lo lawnglawng an si. Mi tampi in pastor hnenah bawmnak an dil nan pastor pa hrangah rualpi tha ti thei ding minng an um lo theu. Pastor pawl cu milai an si vekin harsatnak an nei ve. Cui an harsatnak pawl theihpi tu ding khawpin rinsan mi rualpi tha an nei lo theu.

Theihtha:
Pastor: Milai zohman famkim kan um lo vekin pastor khal a famkim lo. Cutin famkim lonak cio cu zalen zetin kawhhran member pawl hnenah pholang ngam ding asi. Cutin kawhhran tuanrel upa pawl le sungtel pawl lak ihsin siseh pawnlam ihsin siseh rualpitha, Khrih ah unau vekin nunpi zir ding asi.
Mipi: Pastor pawl hnenah sawiselnak le bawmnak lawng hawl loin pastor pa hnenah bawmtu tha, rualpi tha si zuam cio sawn ding kan si.

  1. Fellonak (Moral Failure)
100 ah 33 (33%) pastor pawlin nunau mipa pehtlaihnak ah an fel lo thu an sim suak. Pastor pawl (nunau mipa thu) fel lonak cu zumtu menmen fel lonak hnakin tampi a siatsuah sawn theu asi. Nunau mipa lam fel lonak hrial thei dingin lamzin pakhatkhat tuah a tha. A falin nunau thawn (pastor nu hrangah, mipa thawn) tikcu hmang dah lo ding, fala le tlangval vekin biak sawn aw dah lo ding, fala lole tlangval (opposite sex) thawn tawn awk tikah nupi/pasal theihpi ringring a tha. Computer ah siseh video ah siseh pastor le rawngbawltu zumtu hrimhrim in nunau mipa sualnak zuknung pawl zoh hrimhrim lo ding asi. Computer neihmi pawl tla zoh theih lo in tuah theh ding asi.

Theihtha:
Pastor: Nunau (opposite sex) thawn afal in tikcu hmang tlanglo a tha. Lairam ah an hman theu mi taksa nam ter, hmetter tivek hman lo a tha. Thlacam ding khalah a fal in room sungah thlacam tlang lo a tha. Fimkhur ten dinhmun hrial ringring thei a tha.
Mipi: Pastor cu milai asi vekin a falten pastor pa thawn um tlang ding beisei lo a tha (pastor pa ih opposite agenda in).

  1. Sumpai harsatnak (Financial Pressure)
100 ah 70 (70%) pawlin an hlawh ding zat an hlawh lo asi tiah an ruat. An hlawhman a mal tikah an insang, nupi fanau an zoh duh vekin an zoh theih lo tikah an kiangkap ah an rualpi pawl in motor thatha, inn thatha, thawn an nupi fanau nuamnung zetin an ret lai ah harsa zetin an nun tikah beidawng in sumpai hawl in pawnlamah an suak ih an pastor hnatuan an bansan theu.

Theihtha:
Pastor: Sumpai lam budget tuahtha tha zetin pastor pawlin zir le theih, hman, nunpi thiam a thupi.
Mipi: Pastor pawlin an thlahlawh lawng si loin sungtel pawlin pastor te tulsam mi bawmbawi in ziangtin anmah le dinhmun thawn mil aw mi, an tuanman an ngah ding peksuah thiam ding asi. Thenhra thenkhat (1/10) cu puithiam pawl ei ding ti a rak sin an santhar san ah 1/10 cu puithiam pawl pek asi nawn lo tikah pastor hi farah ding, har tuar ter ding tiah ruah ding asi lo. An tuanman cu ei dingin Bible in a simmi asi sawn.

  1. Thinhengnak (Anger)
America ramah kumtin te biak inn (kawhhran) thar 4,000 dinsuah asi lai aih biak inn 7,000 khar asi. Biak inn sungah sungtel pawl an khawm mal deuhdeuh, an phunzai, sawiselnak a tam sinsin, hlawhman a mal, tvp, in kawhhran sung buainak ruangah thinheng hngirteu in pastor tampi an um. Cutin pastor lungawi lonak cun kawhhran member pawl lakah meisa kang vekin a karhzai vivo. Netnak ah pastor tampi in an hnatuan an cawlhsan.

Theihtha:
Pastor: Satan hmanrua tha bik pakhat cu zumtu pawl “Bawipa ah kan lungawinak” siatsuah asi. Ziangah tile “Bawipa ah kan lungawinak cu kan cahnak asi.” Thlaici forh dingin le tidai tawih dingin lo lakah a vaktu cu milai sihman sehla a keih tertu le thangtertu cu Pathian asi.
Mipi: Pastor pawl thinhengnak tuahtu si hi nuntawinak, siat tawnnak asi. Na umnak kawhhran ah siseh khui tawk hmun khalah pastor pawl thinheng nak tuah tahratin satan hnatuanpi na si ding maw, Pathian siahhlawh pawl bawmtu tha si in Pathian hmanrua na si ding maw, hril ding na nei.

  1. Cau-rau (Burnout)
100 ah 90 (90%) pastor pawl hi zarhkhat sungah nahzi 55-75 hna an tuan. Sunzan, zingsim, zarhtawp ti um loin biak inn sung hantuan lawng si loin inn tin mino damlo, sizung, thawng inn, accident nak hmun siseh member pawlih an sawr, an ko, an fial, anmah te hnatuan ding an hawl ih an tuan thei nawn lo tiang in nitin an tikcu can, an thazang le ruahnak cem ko hna an tuan. Curuangah pastor pawl cu hahdam zetin cawlh hahdam, thuruat, Bible zir, Pathian pawlkom awknak nei ding an sisawn.

Theihtha:
Pastor: kawhhran hruaitu pawl liangparah hnatuan tampi hngat thei dingin tuah ding asi. Pastor lawnglawng in ziangkim tuan theh ding asi lo. Kawhhran upa/deacon pawl in kawhhran member pawl zoh, kilkhawi, bawmbawi, sawn ding an si. Cutin an hnatuan tuan suak thei dingin zirh, kaihhruai ding an si.
Mipi: Pastor in Pathian tuanvo pek vekin hnatuan, thuthangtha simsuah le nunpi thei dingin thildang hnatuan phut ding an silo. Anmahte hahdam zet in thinlung dai zet in Pathian Thlarau kaihhruainak in an nung ih an lungsungah Pathian fial vekin thildang (social) hnatuan khal tuan ding an si sawn. Pastor parah thuneihnak nei in siseh phutmi nei in uktu vekin phurrit pek ding asilo.

  1. Taksa harhdamnak (Physical Health)
100 ah 75 (75%) pastor pawl hi thinlung bang (stree-related) ruangah dam lonak an nei (an rawngbawl sung can khatkhat ah) ti asi. Pastor hrekkhat cu hnatuan ah an buai tuk tikah an taksa thaten an kilkhawi lo. Ei in an fimkhur lo. Cawlh hahdamnak can tha an hmang lo. Exercise an tuah lo.

Theihtha:
Pastor: Thinlung, taksa, thlarau hardam nak hrangah pastor pawlin tuah hrimhrim dingmi asi. Harhdam zetin kum saupi Pathian rian thei dingin minung lam in tuah thei mi, lehnak, ei in, exercise, tuah in kilkhawi awk ding asi (Pastoir pohpoh pum dur ding ti ah Bible in in zirh lo J )
Mipi: Pastor pawl thinlung bang dingin siseh an harhdamnak tiang siatsuah ding khawp in an rawngbawlnak ah hna an tuan maw, an kiangkap thu buai a um maw, sawlselnak, dodalnak a um maw, tvp zoh in bawmbawi ding kan si sawn. Pastor hrang ah phurrit pet u si hlah uhsi.


  1. Insang (Marriage/Family Problems)
100 ah 80 (80%) pastor pawlin an rawngbawlnak ruangah a sezawngin an inn sangah harsatnak an tawn phah asi tiah an ruat. Biak inn sung, kawhhran hnatuan hi thupi bik ah an ret ih insang cu ngaihsak loin an um tikah insang buainak an tawn phah theu. Nupa, insang hi a thupibikah ret ding asi. Insang siat ding khawp in Pathian in zohman rawngbawl a fial dah lo, nupi pasal nei lo lawlaw an sile thuhran. Cuhnakin insang zohdan, kilkhawi danah zohthim tlak sawn ding asi. Pastor pakkhat in a nupi a pehtlaih nak hnakih thupi sawn leitlun ah pehtlaih nak a nei lo. Nupi fanau kilkhawi pehtlaih nak ah a thupi bikah ret ding asi.

Theihtha:
Pastor: Pathian in insang, nupi fanau a lo pek ahcun cumi siat ding khawp in Pathian in hnatuan a lo fial dah lo ding. A thupi bik sawn cu insang pa, Pathian aiawh in nangmai insang cu duhdawtnak luangliam thawn kilkhawi le nawmpi ding sawn asi.

Mipi: Pastor insang hi ziangtin kan bawm thei dign, an harsatnak ah dinpi in, an nupi fanau pawl tla ulenau vekin zoh ih an harsatnak ah bawmtu tha si thei zuam ding kan si. Pastor insang, nupi le fanau pawl hi dodal, zoh tleu ding an si lo. Pathian nan duhdawrtnak cu Pathian in amai aiawh in kawhhran ah riantu a siahhlawh a retmi pawl nan duhdawtnak in langter ding asi. Pastor hnen ihsin ngahnak lawng duh in a nupi le fanau duhdawt lo asile thiltha asilo.

  1. Buai tuk (Too Busy/Driven)

100 ah 90 (90%) pastor pawl hi an hnatuan dingmi tiah an ruahmi fel famkim zetin a tuan thei lo lawnglawng an si. An hnatuan kaihmi kilkip ah famkim zetin tuan dignah zirnak an tlasam ringring. Buai tuk ringring (busy) hi thiltha asilo. Cuhnakin thinlung le taksa hahdam zetin ziangkim Pathian hmai ah thu bur hmaisa hnu ah ciamciam ten hnatuan ding asi.

Theihtha:
Pastor: buai tuk (busy) nak in thil tampi a siatsuah sawn theu. Curuangah “No” ti zirh a tul. Mipi pawl phutmi pohpoh “e law” ti ding asilo. Pathian thu sawn ah dingzetin din ding asi. A thupi khaikhawm thiam (prioritized) tuah thiam in nepnawi ah buai rero ding asilo.
Mipi: Pastor pawl tuah dingmi parah zohman in thuneihnak an neilo, Pathian lawng in thuneihnak a nei. Pastor in a tuah dingmi a tuah lo ih daithlang in a to men, a vaktawi men siar lo, mipi pawl in duhdan tangdor nak thawn sim a thiang. Asinan pastor phurrit pe tahratin himi kha mi tuah aw, tiah pastor hi uk ding asilo. Hahdam zetin thinlung dai ten Pathian thawn pawlkom awknak tikcu hmangin tuu rual khal ding an si.




10 Real Reasons Pastors Quit Too Soon
by Tim Peters

Over 1,700 pastors leave the ministry every month. This staggering number includes some of the brightest, most inspiring pastors in the country. To prevent the continued flight of our pastors, we need to understand the cause of the problem. Though every situation is unique, the reasons pastors leave are often similar. Here are 10 common reasons pastors quit too soon.

1. Discouragement
50% of pastors report feeling sodiscouraged they would leave the ministry if they could. Complaints speak louder than compliments. You can receive 15 compliments and one complaint, and the complaint will stick. When you hear criticism and look out to see empty pews, it can be difficult to recognize the positive impact you’re making. The key is to remember: no matter how much negative you hear, you’re always doing 10 times more good.

2. Failure
70% of pastors say they have a lower self-image now than when they started. Many pastors have difficulty recognizing success. They compare themselves to other pastors and other ministries. Comparisons produce only two outcomes: (1) you think you’re better, which results in excessive pride; or (2) you feel like you don’t measure up, which creates a sense of failure. The key is not to compare, but to celebrate your successes.

3. Loneliness
70% of pastors do not have someone they consider a close friend.With so many people looking to pastors for guidance, it can be difficult for pastors to let their guards down. They don’t want to come across as less than perfect. They feel they can’t be transparent and vulnerable. That creates a sense of isolation. It’s important for pastors to find people they can open up and share their struggles with, instead of absorbing and isolating.

4. Moral Failure
33% of pastors confess having involved in inappropriate sexual behavior.The moral failures of pastors are magnified more than the average person. The key to avoiding moral failures is creating a system of risk prevention. When you meet with someone of the opposite sex: let your spouse know, never meet behind closed doors, and do not discuss relationship issues. For pornography, software is available to monitor or block web activity.

5. Financial Pressure
70% of pastors feel grossly underpaid.Most ministries are nonprofits, so pastors are not compensated well. When you can’t fully provide the life you want for your family, it makes it hard to continue. Then you look at friends not in the ministry with big houses and nice cars. Pastors can relieve the pressure with better financial planning. Try following the 8-10-10 rule – 10% to church, 10% to savings, and 80% to live off.

6. Anger
4,000 new churches begin each year and7,000 churches close. When things aren’t going well, pastors become angry – with others, themselves, or God. Thoughts fall along these lines: “I did everything you told me. I went to seminary. I started a ministry. Why are you not doing what you said?” The worst thing about anger is it spreads like wild fire. The medicine for anger is forgiveness. We have to forgive so we can move forward.

7. Burnout
90% of the pastors report working between 55 to 75 hours per week.Pastors are put on a treadmill. They go from the ministry to a hospital visit to writing a sermon to meeting with congregation members. They just keep running until there’s no passion or energy left. They become exhausted and depleted. Vacations and sabbaticals can provide perspective. Another key is empowering other leaders so all the weight is not on the pastor’s shoulders.

8. Physical Health
75% of pastors report significant stress-related crisis at least once in their ministry.Many pastors overwork themselves and simply do not care for their bodies. When you’re busy, it’s easy to eat poorly. But eating the right foods is essential to physical health. It’s the difference between fueling the body and depleting the body. Pastors also don’t get enough rest or regular exercise. Exercise makes a huge difference in physical and mental health.

9. Marriage/Family Problems
80% of pastors believe pastoral ministry has negatively affected their families.Too often, a pastor’s spouse and children end up taking a backseat to the ministry. The key is balance. Marriage has to be a top priority. Your relationship with your spouse is the most important relationship you have on this earth. You have to nurture your family relationships – whether that means having family night or seeking counseling.

10. Too Busy/Driven
90% of pastors feel they are inadequately trained to cope with the ministry demands.A lot of pastors simply are not working efficiently. They are not protecting their calendars or giving themselves the space they need. They haven’t learned how to say “no”. Being busy is not always being productive. Pastors need to find ways to maximize the use of their time. You have to learn how to say “no” at the right times.
Take a look at these 10 points, then pray and ask God: What area do I really need to address? Where am I struggling?Once you identify the areas where you need to improve, take these three steps:
Ask for help. If you’re struggling, there is absolutely nothing wrong with asking someone for help.
Institute accountability.Find a group or person to keep you accountable in the areas you think you are weak.
Take ownership of your choices.More than anyone else, you control the path you walk.
Take actions and precautions to make sure you don’t let any of these 10 reasons separate you from your passion for the ministry and your calling.




PATHIAN IH A TEN MI THIL PASARIH




Thufim 6:16-19

1.Puarthau mithmai


Hi hi Pathian ih a ten emem mi a si. Pathian rori in a ten ti

cu a tawpkhawk mi tawng le lungput a si. Minung hi kan thlen cin I zir
le kan neih mi I zir in puarthau a awl zet. (1Pt.5:5) Pathian in a ten
lawng si lo in a daldal bet a si.


Unau na dinhmun ruangah le na thlennak I zir ruangah na puarthau

pang maw? Bawipai ten mi a siruangah tih a nung tuk mi a si. Puarthau
pang hlah uh si.

2.Thuphanpertu lei


Thuphan ti cu thudik ih ral a siruangah Pathian in cucu a

ten lawlaw. Thuphanper pang hi awl ngaingai a si. Ziangahtile mai
tanghma sialnak a si ih, mah le mah khaisan awknak khal a si. Cu vek
cu Pathian in a ten tuk. Zumtu in kan theih ding mi cu thuphan ih
ramlak hi a tha lo a si ti hi. Thuphan hi per lo hram uh si la thudik
rel lo can hi nei uh si.


Unau thuphanper hi zawngsang a awl ngaingai thuphan cu per lo rori

tum uh si. Pathian ih ten mi a si.

3.Misual lo a that tu kut


Mawi sualnak ziang hman a nei lo mi vathah mai hi Pathian in a

ten tuk. Mi thah hrimhrim hi Pathian in a duh lo ih cuihleiah mawh
sualnak ziang hman a nei lo tu vathah bet sinsin cu Pathian in a ten
tuk. Unau tum pangpang hlah aw. Cun na tuan ding khalah ruat hlah aw.

4.Sualralnak lawng khua a khangtu thinlung


Pathian in thinlung hi duh um emem in in neih ter ih cuih in
 neih ter mi cun a mai duh zawng lam khuakhang dah lo ih a duh lo zawng lawnglawng khua kan khan cu Pathian in a ten tuk. Unau na nitin nun lam tluanih na tumtah le na khawkhan theu mipawl kha ruat hnik aw la Pathian duh zawng an si theu maw?
Sualralnak lam khawkhan cu a awl in a nuam zet. Pathian duh zawng
lam khawkhan cu khawkhan men a si ko nan kan paih tuk lo. Zumtu in kan
theih tul mi cu khawkhan menmen cu a pawi lo pi ti ih daithlan men
ding a si lo Pathian in a ten a si ti hi.

5.Sual tuh dingih a zamrangtu


Thiltha tuah dingah cun muang cang zet, sual tuah dingah

hmuah zam rang zet lala si. Hi vek minung cu Pathian in a ten tuk.
Sual kan tuah hi tuah laiah cun a nuam zet vek cu a bang nan leh hnuih
tuan man rah kan par ih a thlen cun a nuam nawn lo. Curuangah thiltha
tuah dingah cun kan zam rang kei thil sual tuah dingah cun kan muang
cang hram ke. Pathian in sual tuah dingih zam rangpawl a ten tuk.

6.Theihpitu dik lo ih tan


Thutheihpitu dik lo ih tan cu Pathian in a ten tuk. Theihpitu
 ih kan tang ding a si hmanah a dik mi zawngih tan ding a si. Dik lonak pauhpauh cu Pathian in a huan in a ten tuk. Zumtupawl in kan tannak ding cu diknak par lawngah a si a tul. Na unau an si hmanah dik lo ih an nun le an um ah cun tanpi lo lawlaw aw. Theihpitu dik lo ih kan tan cun sual thape khal kan si cih.

7.Unaupawl lakih harsatnak a suahpi theutu


Harsatnak mi thlen tu cu Pathian in a ten mi an si. Mi dang
 hrangah malsawmnak kan si thei lo hmanah harsatnak petu cu si lo hram
tum a tul. Nangmah le keimai ruangih mi innsang, mi Kawhhran, mi nupa
karlak pawlah harsatnak a thleng pang a si ah cun Pathian in I ten a
si ti kan theih awk a tha.


Zumtu le nuh Pathian ih a ten mipawl hi zoh rero tikah kanmah
minung khal in kan ten mi an si thluh ko. Curuangah a tuahtu si lo in
Pathian lamah tang in a dodal tu si sawn uh si. Pathian in nunnak in
pe ih a duh lo zawng tuahnak le a ten zawng tuahnak ih kan hmanawk
pang a si ah cun a pawi tuk ding. Curuangah Pathian ih a ten mi teng
thei ve dingin Pathian hmaiah kun uh si.

Evan Lal Eng Lian






Pu San Thawm Ling ih nupi Pi Dawt Nu ih a ruangparih thucah


Aw! a va mak ngai ve.
Pu San Thawm ih nunte cu:

Nupi hrangih "Pasal Tha"
Fa lei hrangih "Pa tha",
Nu le Pai hrangih "Fapa tha"
Pi le Pu pawl hrangih "Tupa tha",
U le nau, sungkhat hrang khalih "U nau tha" a rak si ngai maw?
Hi tivek Pacangtha si hi a va dawt um tak ve.

Kan Chin mi, Innsang tin, Kawhhran tin le Pawlkom tin ih um  Pacang tha tiaw pawl kan zaten kan ruat ve cio maw? Hi thil pa 4 lak ah sam mi na nei ve maw?
Pasal tha lawng tla na si thei,
Tu pa tha lawng tla na si thei,
Fapa tha lawng tla na si thei,
U nau tha lawng tla na si thei,
Asinan a zate kawprawp ih sithei hi zuam tlak taktak a si.




Ka thin i run thawng deuh khaw ka run bet men, lungthiang ten.

John Bawi Luai, Tachileik





Wednesday, June 27, 2012

THLACAM KAN HLAWHSAMNAK SAN (7)


                             
                                    Stephen Tha Nei Fai

(1) Kan thlacam daan a dik lo (James 4:3)
     Bible in," Thla nan cam tikah nan dil dik lo ruangah nan hlawhsam theu. Nan mai nomnak ding lawnglawng ruatin thla nan cam," in ti. Kan mai ngahnak ding, kan hlawknak ding, kan tluannak ding lawnglawng ruatih thla kan cam hi Pathian in leh in tum lo. Kan Pathian sunlawinak ding le kan minung pipawl ih thathnemnak ding ruatin thla kan cam le a hlawknak cotu cu kan mah lala kan si theu. Curuangah zumtu unau, midang hrangah thlacam tam awla Pathian in nangmai tulsammi a lo pe tengteng ding.

(2) Amah ah kan um ringring lo (John 15:7)
    Jesuh in,"Nan ni keimah ih nan um ringring ih ka thu nan sungih a um ahcun nan dilmi hmuahhmuah peek nan si ding," in ti. Samson kha Pathian thusungih a um ahcun tidai adil khalle Bawipa'n a pe mai. Nehnak a dilih a ngah mai. Asinan Pathian thu ih a um lo cun a dilmi lehsak a si nawn lo. Cubak ah sar thih
tiangin a thih mai. Nga cu ti sung lawngih cahnak an neih bangin zumtu khal Pathian thu sungah cahnak le hlawhtlin tbeinak kan nei.

(3) Rinhmainak kan nei (James 1:6-8)
     Pathian ih in pe ngaingai cuang pei maw? ti thinlung put thawi thlacam cu a phi ngah a theih lo. Thinlung hngethngai nei lo ih thlacam cu thli ih hran rero mi tisuar vek men a si. Zumtu cun thla kan cam tikah Bawipa in in ngai, Bawipa in in thei, in let tengteng ding ti zumnak thawn thla kan cam ding.

(4) Aduh zawng in thla kan cam lo (I John 5:14-15)
     Johan in ,"Kan nih cu Pathian hmai ah ralthatnak kan nei. Ziangruangahtile a duh zawngih kan dil ahcun Pathian in kan thlacam in let ti kan thei" a ti. Pathian duhzawng thei ding cun piangthar si a tul, a duhdan ih nun a tul, Thlarau Thianghlim ih kaihhruaimi si tengteng a tul. Thlarau Thianghlim lawngin Pathian duhdan taktak cu a thei.

(5) Pathian ih daan kan ngaihthah (Thufim 28:9)
     Bible in Pathian ih daan ziangsiar lo ih thlacam cu tenum men a si a ti. Leidaan hmanah fapa / fanu nu le pa ziangsiar lo tukih nung cun nu le pai duhsaknak an co thei lo pi. A daan ngai poimawh tu Daniel, Elijah, Elisha,
le Tirhthlah pawl khi an thlacam Pathian in a let ringring ti kan thei. Daan ngai poimawh ti cu Pathian tihzah ih  nun tinak a si deuh bik.

(6) Sual kan poisa lo (Saam 66:18)
     Siangpahrang David in, "Ka thinlung ih sual ka ngai poimawh lo ahcun ka thlacam khal Pathian in in let lo," ati. Mai duhduh ih nung cingih Pathian hnenih mai duhduh dil cu Pathian hrang ahcun a huat um taktak. Pathian poisa
tucun sual khal a poisa tengteng. Mai duhbik mi fala/ tlangval huatmi cu zo so tuah rero ngam ding?

(7) Beidong lo in thla kan cam lo (Luke 18:1-8)
     Jesuh in beidong lo ih thla kan cam ringring ding thu tahthimnak hmangin in sim. Khua pakhat ah thuthentu bawi pakhat a um. A inhnen nuhmei nu in a thuhla rel sak dingin a tur hnawh, a ngen ringring ih zamrang te'n a thuhla
a rel sak. Cubangin sunzan ih beidong lo ih Pathian hnenih bomnak dil tucu Pathian in a leh sak ringring a ti. Zumtu tampi cu thla kan cam tikah kan bei dong ol tuk. Pathian ih in pek hlanah kan beidong mai ih thlacam kan baang sal mai theu.

Friday, June 22, 2012

Which one do you lose?


If you lose your money, you lose nothing,
If you lose your health, you lose something,
If you lose your character, you lose everything! 

Which one do you lose?

Midang in Na Thu An lo Relsiat Tikah (Criticism)!




  1. Ziang tivek ih na um khal le na thu cu an lo relsia thotho ding. Curuangah, na tuah dingmi kha tuah mei aw.
  2. An lo relmi kha a dik maw ti sut aw awla, a dik ahcun, rem aw. A dikmi parah rem aw thiamtu cu mifim a si. A dik lo ahcun, taan san men aw. President Abraham Lincoln kha mihrek in a siatnak an rel ciamco. Cutikah, a rualpi pawl in ziangah na let hngai lo tiah an sut. Cutikah, a timi cu, “Ka thuhla a dik lo ih an simmi hmuahhmuah ka leh ahcun, thil thupi dangdang tuahnak caan ka nei nawn lo ding” tiah a ti.
  3. Veikhat ah minung 10 innsangpi kai an zuam aw. Mipi in tha an pe ih an kai. Sinan, a hrek hrawng an thlen tikah, a hrek mipi in rungtum men aw tiah an auh. Mihrek in na tla lak ding, na kai thei nawn lo le tum aw tiah an ti ih, an kai dingmi le tthat 100 a si fawn. Midang pawl an ttum theh lai ah, pakhat cu a kai sinsin ih tthat 100 cu a kai suak. Ziangruangah si pei tiah interview an tuah tikah, cupa cu a hna a rak set ti a si. Thanaunak aw pawl kha hnaset tun mei aw la, na tuah dingmi kha ka thleng tengteng ding timi ruahsannak thawn kai vingvo aw.
  4. Tlaangleeng mawngtu si aw la, na tlaang lengah mi zapi tein an khah hlan lo ka feh lo ding tiah na ti ahcun, khui tik hman ah na tlaangleeng a feh thei dah lo ding. Cuhnak in, mi pakhat te an si khal le, feh aw, mihrek cu hmat deng pahnih thumnak in an ra kai leh ding. Feh rero mei aw.
    • Hna na tuan tikah, hmakhat te ah hlawhtlinnak ruat hlah. Na tuah dingm lawng tuah mei aw la, nuam tete in thil fate pawl kha na theh suak vingvo ding. Thil fate tampi theh suaknak in tampi na theh suak thei ding.
    • Mizapi in an lungkim le lawng ka tuah ding tivek ih na ruah ahcun thil na tuah suak thei dah lo ding. Mihrek cun, na tuah hnu tawkfang in an lo pawk leh ding. 



Midang Thiltuahmi Zohfelsal/Faksel Daan (Critique)

by Sanno
Midang thiltuahmi zohfelsalnak hi mirang cun Critique tiah an ko. 

critique |krɪˈtik|noun
a detailed analysis and assessment of something, esp. a literary,philosophicalor political theory.

Critique timi hi Lai tong cun, zohfelsalnak ti a si. Mihrek in fakselnak ti khal in an ko.  Laimi hi midang ih thil tuahmi zohfel sal daan kan thiam theu lo. Midang ih canganmi maw, thil tuahmi maw kan zohfel sal tikah Kan tuah lo dingmi le tuah dingmi langh ter ka duh. 

Tuah dingmi le tuah lo dingmi: 

1. Midang ih canganmi thatein siar ta lo in soisel hlah. 
2. Na soisel hlan ah a tuah thami kha lungawi thu sim ta aw. Himi na tuah le, na soiselmi kha rem a tum ding. 
3. Na soisel tikah, a tuahmi par lawngah soisel aw. A minung soisel hlah. 
4. Na soisel ahcun, na rem ter duh daan khal langh ter aw. Soisel men hlah.  
5. Na thinhen lai ah cangan in thlah cih mei hlahNa thindai hnu ah vei khat siar sal aw a tha na ti le thlah leh aw. 
6. Vei khat tal siar sal aw. 




Thursday, June 21, 2012

Luther's Theology of the Cross



Carl R. Trueman 


No one could have expected that the Reformation would be launched by Martin Luther's Ninety-Five Theses against Indulgences in October 1517. The document itself simply proposed the framework for a university debate. Luther was arguing only for a revision of the practice of indulgences, not its abolition. He was certainly not offering an agenda for widespread theological and ecclesiastical reform.

Indeed, he had already said much more controversial things in his Disputation against Scholastic Theology of September 4, 1517, in which he critiqued the whole way in which medieval theology had been done for centuries. That disputation, however, passed without a murmur. Indeed, humanly speaking, it was only the unique combination of external factors—social, economic, and political—that made the later disputation the spark that lit the Reformation fuse.

The Heidelberg Disputation

Once the fuse had been lit, however, the church made a fatal error: she allowed the Augustinian Order, to which Luther belonged, to deal with the problem as if it were a minor local difficulty. There was to be a meeting of the Order in Heidelberg in April 1518, and Luther was asked to present a series of theses outlining his theology, so that it could be assessed by his brethren. It was here, then, that the relatively bland Ninety-Five Theses gave Luther an important opportunity to articulate the theology that he had expressed in his SeptemberDisputation.

The Heidelberg Disputation is significant for two things. First, there was at least one other future Reformation giant present. This was Martin Bucer, the Reformer of Strasbourg, who would end his days as professor of divinity at Cambridge. A man of vast intellect and wide ecumenical vision, Bucer was to have a profound influence on a generation of Reformers, not least John Calvin. And his first taste of Reformation thinking was provided by Luther at Heidelberg in 1517. Yet, while Bucer left the disputation marveling at how Luther had attacked what the church had become, he missed the theological core of what Luther was saying. This is the second point of importance: the theology of the cross.

The Theology of the Cross

Toward the end of the disputation, Luther offered some theses which seem (in typical Luther fashion) nonsensical, or at least obscure:

19. That person does not deserve to be called a theologian who looks upon the invisible things of God as though they were clearly perceptible in those things which have actually happened [Rom. 1:20].
20. He deserves to be called a theologian, however, who comprehends the visible and manifest things of God seen through suffering and the cross.21. A theologian of glory calls evil good and good evil. A theologian of the cross calls the thing what it actually is.22. That wisdom which sees the invisible things of God in works as perceived by man is completely puffed up, blinded, and hardened.
These statements actually encapsulate the heart of Luther's theology, and a good grasp of what he means by the obscure terms and phrases they contain sheds light not just on the doctrinal content of his theology, but also on the very way that he believed theologians should think. Indeed, he is taking Paul's explosive argument from 1 Corinthians and developing it into a full theological agenda.

At the heart of his argument is his notion that human beings should not speculate about who God is or how he acts in advance of actually seeing whom he has revealed himself to be. Thus, Luther sees God's revelation of himself as axiomatic to all theology. Now, there probably is not a heretic in history who would not agree with that, because all theology presupposes the revelation of God, whether in nature, human reason, culture, or whatever.

Luther, however, had a dramatically restrictive view of revelation. God revealed himself as merciful to humanity in the Incarnation, when he manifested himself in human flesh, and the supreme moment of that revelation was on the cross at Calvary. Indeed, Luther sometimes referred enigmatically to Christ crucified as "God's backside"—the point at which God appeared to be the very contradiction of all that one might reasonably have anticipated him to be.

The "theologians of glory," therefore, are those who build their theology in the light of what they expect God to be like—and, surprise, surprise, they make God to look something like themselves. The "theologians of the cross," however, are those who build their theology in the light of God's own revelation of himself in Christ hanging on the cross.

Implications

The implications of this position are revolutionary. For a start, Luther is demanding that the entire theological vocabulary be revised in light of the cross. Take for example the wordpower. When theologians of glory read about divine power in the Bible, or use the term in their own theology, they assume that it is analogous to human power. They suppose that they can arrive at an understanding of divine power by magnifying to an infinite degree the most powerful thing of which they can think. In light of the cross, however, this understanding of divine power is the very opposite of what divine power is all about. Divine power is revealed in the weakness of the cross, for it is in his apparent defeat at the hands of evil powers and corrupt earthly authorities that Jesus shows his divine power in the conquest of death and of all the powers of evil. So when a Christian talks about divine power, or even about church or Christian power, it is to be conceived of in terms of the cross—power hidden in the form of weakness.

For Luther, the same procedure must be applied to other theological terms. For example, God's wisdom is demonstrated in the foolishness of the cross. Who would have thought up the foolish idea of God taking human flesh in order to die a horrendous death on behalf of sinners who had deliberately defied him, or God making sinners pure by himself becoming sin for them, or God himself raising up a people to newness of life by himself submitting to death? We could go on, looking at such terms as life, blessing, holiness, andrighteousness. Every single one must be reconceived in the light of the cross. All are important theological concepts; all are susceptible to human beings casting them in their own image; and all must be recast in the light of the cross.

This insight is one of the factors in Luther's thinking that gives his theology an inner logic and coherence. Take, for example, his understanding of justification, whereby God declares the believer to be righteous in his sight, not by virtue of any intrinsic righteousness (anything that the believer has done or acquired), but on the basis of an alienrighteousness, the righteousness of Christ that remains external to the believer. Is this not typical of the strange but wonderful logic of the God of the cross? The person who is really unrighteous, really mired in sin, is actually declared by God to be pure and righteous! Such a truth is incomprehensible to human logic, but makes perfect sense in light of the logic of the cross.

And what of the idea of a God who comes down and loves the unlovely and the unrighteous before the objects of his love have any inclination to love him or do good? Such is incomprehensible to the theologians of glory, who assume that God is like them, like other human beings, and thus only responds to those who are intrinsically attractive or good, or who first earn his favor in some way. But the cross shows that God is not like that: against every assumption that human beings might make about who God is and how he acts, he requires no prior loveliness in the objects of his love; rather, his prior love creates that loveliness without laying down preconditions. Such a God is revealed with amazing and unexpected tenderness and beauty in the ugly and violent drama of the cross.

The Key to Christian Ethics and Experience

Luther does not restrict the theology of the cross to an objective revelation of God. He also sees it as the key to understanding Christian ethics and experience. Foundational to both is the role of faith: to the eyes of unbelief, the cross is nonsense; it is what it seems to be—the crushing, filthy death of a man cursed by God. That is how the unbelieving mind interprets the cross—foolishness to Greeks and an offence to Jews, depending on whether your chosen sin is intellectual arrogance or moral self-righteousness. To the eyes opened by faith, however, the cross is seen as it really is. God is revealed in the hiddenness of the external form. And faith is understood to be a gift of God, not a power inherent in the human mind itself.

This principle of faith then allows the believer to understand how he or she is to behave. United to Christ, the great king and priest, the believer too is both a king and a priest. But these offices are not excuses for lording it over others. In fact, kingship and priesthood are to be enacted in the believer as they are in Christ—through suffering and self-sacrifice in the service of others. The believer is king of everything by being a servant of everyone; the believer is completely free by being subject to all. As Christ demonstrated his kingship and power by death on the cross, so the believer does so by giving himself or herself unconditionally to the aid of others. We are to be, as Luther puts it, little Christs to our neighbors, for in so doing we find our true identity as children of God.

This argument is explosive, giving a whole new understanding of Christian authority. Elders, for example, are not to be those renowned for throwing their weight around, for badgering others, and for using their position or wealth or credentials to enforce their own opinions. No, the truly Christian elder is the one who devotes his whole life to the painful, inconvenient, and humiliating service of others, for in so doing he demonstrates Christlike authority, the kind of authority that Christ himself demonstrated throughout his incarnate life and supremely on the cross at Calvary.

Great Blessings through Great Suffering

The implications of the theology of the cross for the believer do not stop there. The cross is paradigmatic for how God will deal with believers who are united to Christ by faith. In short, great blessing will come through great suffering.
This point is hard for those of us in the affluent West to swallow. For example, some years ago I lectured at a church gathering on this topic and pointed out that the cross was not simply an atonement, but a revelation of how God deals with those whom he loves. I was challenged afterwards by an individual who said that Luther's theology of the cross did not give enough weight to the fact that the cross and resurrection marked the start of the reversal of the curse, and that great blessings should thus be expected; to focus on suffering and weakness was therefore to miss the eschatological significance of Christ's ministry.

Of course, this individual had failed to apply Luther's theology of the cross as thoroughly as he should have done. All that he said was true, but he failed to understand what he was saying in light of the cross. Yes, Luther would agree, the curse is being rolled back, but that rollback is demonstrated by the fact that, thanks to the cross, evil is now utterly subverted in the cause of good. If the cross of Christ, the most evil act in human history, can be in line with God's will and be the source of the decisive defeat of the very evil that caused it, then any other evil can also be subverted to the cause of good.

More than that, if the death of Christ is mysteriously a blessing, then any evil that the believer experiences can be a blessing too. Yes, the curse is reversed; yes, blessings will flow; but who declared that these blessings have to be in accordance with the aspirations and expectations of affluent America? The lesson of the cross for Luther is that the most blessed person upon earth, Jesus Christ himself, was revealed as blessed precisely in his suffering and death. And if that is the way that God deals with his beloved son, have those who are united to him by faith any right to expect anything different?

This casts the problem of evil in a somewhat different light for Luther than, say, for Harold Kushner, the rabbi who wrote When Bad Things Happen to Good People. They happen, Luther would say, because that is how God blesses them. God accomplishes his work in the believer by doing his alien work (the opposite of what we expect); he really blesses by apparently cursing.

Indeed, when it is grasped that the death of Christ, the greatest crime in history, was itself willed in a deep and mysterious way by the triune God, yet without involving God in any kind of moral guilt, we see the solution to the age-old problem of absolving an all-powerful God of responsibility for evil. The answer to the problem of evil does not lie in trying to establish its point of origin, for that is simply not revealed to us. Rather, in the moment of the cross, it becomes clear that evil is utterly subverted for good. Romans 8:28 is true because of the cross of Christ: if God can take the greatest of evils and turn it to the greatest of goods, then how much more can he take the lesser evils which litter human history, from individual tragedies to international disasters, and turn them to his good purpose as well.

Luther's theology of the cross is too rich to be covered adequately in a single article, but I hope that my brief sketch above will indicate the rich vein of theological reflection which can be mined by those who reflect upon 1 Corinthians 1 and upon the dramatic antitheses between appearance and reality that are scattered throughout Scripture and marshaled with such force by Martin Luther. An antidote to sentimentality, prosperity doctrine, and an excessively worldly eschatology, this is theological gold dust. The cross is not simply the point at which God atones for sin; it is also a profound revelation of who God is and how he acts toward his creation.



The author is professor of church history and historical theology at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia. He is the author of Luther's Legacy: Salvation and English Reformers 1525�1556. Reprinted from New Horizons, October 2005.