Surprised by 'Surprised by Joy'

This week I began to re-read C.S. Lewis' spiritual autobiography - Surprised by Joy. As I go through it, I am re-discovering its insights with pleasure. Do I mean pleasure? Lewis distinguishes carefully between that and joy. Whereas pleasure is merely gratification of some personal desire, joy is more impersonal, transcendent. An aching loss is more joyful than greedy feasting upon something. The longing, rather than possession, is the joyful experience. In this sense it is an other-worldly sensation - a hankering after heaven. 'God has set eternity in their heart,' Eccl 3:11.

Recollections from Lewis' private life make interesting reading. His lonely, cruel childhood is described. Indeed, it is almost suggested in the title, from a Wordsworth sonnet describing the loss of a child, his 'heart's best treasure'. Each discovery Lewis makes on the path to God is described so clearly and rationally, it is almost like I am making the same discovery, reaching the same conclusion, as he does. Does this suggest a good writer or a gullible reader? Lewis touches on a similar theme as he recollects, in his atheist phase, his encounter with the works of G.K. Chesterton.

Another amusing task is to trace pictures from Lewis' fictional work back to their sources in his personal experience. For instance, the old professor from The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe might be his tutor in Surrey. The masked mourners in the Pilgrim's Regress seem reminiscent of the stiffly dressed people at his own mother's funeral. The recalcitrant parent in the Screwtape Letters might recall his father, with whom Lewis had trouble engaging.

There are several aspects of this book that I found most encouraging.

1. The diverse ways in which God draws wandering souls to himself.
2. Lewis' description of the utter emptiness of self-gratification (particularly of the fleshly kind) for the sake of the act itself.
3. ...and I'm looking forward to his conversion, on the top deck of an Oxford bus - but I haven't got that far in the story yet!

Is Salvation Selfish?

One of the major Biblical characterizations of humanity in its natural, default state is that we are selfish. "Men shall be lovers of their own selves." [2 Tim 3:2] This is in radical contrast to the two great commandments highlighted by Jesus - love God and love your neighbour. [Matt 22:37-40] Not only Jesus' teaching, but also his life, was characterised by selflessness. He took a towel and washed his disciples' feet. He always looked after other people's needs and concerns, [Phil 2:4-5] giving his life as a sacrifice for his enemies. [Ro 5:10]

So, here's a question. To obtain salvation (by grace alone through faith alone) is to accept eternal life from God. Isn't this the ultimate act of instinctive self-preservation? Surely this act is motivated by selfishness? I agree in one sense - becoming saved is the last selfish act we perform, since once we are Christians, our lives should become living sacrifices - given over in service to God and others.

But actually, we really need to define what we mean by selfishness. To take what we need to survive is only selfish if we are depriving others: Hence we breathe, but there's enough air to go around so that's not selfish. On the other hand, we in western society consume more than our fair share of world food, etc - perhaps this is selfishness?

Returning to the topic of salvation - when we accept what God gives us, are we preventing anyone else from getting it? The answer is a resounding no! God's gift is infinite - the world is His scope. In fact, when we become Christians, we might be starting a spiritual chain reaction, resulting in other people being saved. The apostle Paul is a good example of this. So no - while salvation may be self-preservation, it's not selfishness.

Happy Birthday KJV

The King James Version of the Bible is 400 years old. The Oxford English Dictionary and the BBC have been celebrating this milestone, and tracing the influence of the KJV on the English language.

Although I have been brought up reading the KJV, in my personal readings I often prefer to use more recent translations such as the RSV or the NEB (for) (against). CS Lewis agreed - it's helpful to read the Bible in an accessible and contemporary linguistic setting. After all, Koine Greek (the language of the original New Testament manuscripts) was the vernacular. Again, William Tyndale (the pioneer of English Bible translation) wanted the ploughboy in the field to be able to understand the words of Scripture. So I feel a modern translation is following an age-old (and theologically sound) precedent.

Often I feel slightly embarrassed quoting Bible passages directly from the KJV, especially to people who are unfamiliar with the style. I generally paraphrase as I go - turning "whosoever believeth" into "whoever believes", "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God" into "You shall love the Lord your God" etc.

So it was interesting to listen to various media, thespian and religious celebrities expressing their admiration for the majestic and simple language of the KJV, in the recent BBC Radio 4 broadcasts. I enjoyed listening to the various readings, which were spoken with clarity, passion and a suitable level of dramatic emphasis.

However when I reflected on the comments people made about the KJV, I was struck by the fact that people extoll its virtues as literature, influential upon the development of the English language. However they appear to give little thought to the underlying message of the Bible. Things haven't changed much since Ezekiel's day - we are quite prepared for cultural, high-brow entertainment from the Bible, but we don't want the sharpness of its message to pierce our hearts. What a tragedy! Let's get back to the Bible and read it "as it is in truth, the word of God". [1 Thess 2:13]

Mud and Stars

Two men looked through prison bars:
One saw mud and the other saw stars.

I recently re-encountered this couplet in a Christian article. It brings back a guilty memory, from when I furtively borrowed my sister's Trebizon boarding school stories. In the very first novel, the school headteacher encourages the heroine with this mud/star two-liner.

Apparently, it's a quote by Frederick Langbridge, although wikipedia wasn't too forthcoming with information about him. Anyway, it's the thought that counts - any situation is what we make of it. Do we see that the glass is half-full or half-empty?

As a Christian, I find that I have plenty of causes for optimism. I see the stars, twinkling gleams of glory, and anticipate a wonderful future - rejoicing in hope.
Of course, I'm not unaware of the mud. Most of the time I'm trudging through it, or perhaps assisting others. But the stars help put things in perspective.

Richard Dawkins mentioned something similar in a recent debate with John Lennox. He conceded that Christianity offers a real hope for the future, and a purpose for living in the present. Dawkins could offer neither. Unfortunately, the atheist's horizon does not extend beyond the mud.

Obviously, I believe that Christianity is more than wishful thinking. However star-gazing (literally and metaphorically) is a good pastime for citizens of heaven, as Paul reminded his friends at Philippi (Phil 3:20-21). At the same time, there should be some star-light luminosity exuding from our lives too (Phil 2:15). Perhaps we could be a means of bringing hope to other muddy people?

Natural Disasters



Whenever catastrophes occur, like the earthquakes in Haiti and Chile, we often ask why an Almighty God would allow such disasters to happen. I have read some thought-provoking articles from other authors. Perhaps I take a slightly different view.

The Bible talks about creation groaning and travailing in pain [Ro 8] - very literal, if anthropomorphic, language to describe plate tectonics. We live in a fragile world, a fractured universe, a fallen creation. Why?


Jesus' plaintive words, "From the beginning, these things were not so," apply contextually to ruptures in society, but they ring true for the sad state of the cosmos. Originally, God deemed His creation to be "very good." [Gen 1]. However a perfectly innocent creation has been spoiled by mankind's rebellion against God - initiated by Adam's disobedience.

Here is my main thesis - just as God did not intervene directly to prevent Adam's choice of evil, so He does not intervene today to curtail its consequences. Our world is a dangerous place, and will remain so for the foreseeable future.

Does God operate on a passive, non-interfering basis? Not at all! God has moved to rescue humanity from sin. This rescue-mission was effected by the Lord Jesus Christ, when he gave his life "as a ransom for all, to be testified in due time". [1 Tim 2]. However, salvation requires an opt-in - God's grace and our faith are both necessary salvific ingredients [Eph 2]. Once we receive "the gift of God which is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord" [Ro 6], we become part of God's "new creation." [2 Cor 5].

Ultimately, God will re-create the physical world we inhabit. There will be "no more sea" on the new earth [Rev 22], which symbolises the end of restlessness, transience, groaning and travailing. I don't see any cause for plate tectonics in the new creation...

The evolution of evolution

This year we celebrate the bicentenary of Charles Darwin's birth. Already the BBC has lauded the father of the theory of evolution. Originally propounded as a scientific theory to explain the diversity of species, the evolution bandwagon is now steered by humanist "We don't need a God" fundamentalists. That's what I mean by the evolution of evolution - people take the theory, and from it extrapolate an absolute world-view that does not incorporate the Divine.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a theistic evolutionist at all. I believe in Elohim the Creator. Yes, I go along with a six-day creation, and probably a young earth too. Now - this is my serious point. Christians and Atheists spend all their time arguing about creation vs evolution, intelligent design vs blind watchmakers, etc... We never seem to get past this first hurdle in our amicable debates.

However, the Lord Jesus said that he should be the "stone of stumbling and the rock of offence." If people find anything offputting about the Christian message, it should be the works and words of the Messiah. Shakespeare had it right - "All the world's a stage / And all the men and women merely players". Therefore when the principal actor (indeed, the author Himself!) steps front-stage, we shouldn't be distracted by the origins of the props and stage furniture. Instead we should be concentrating on what He says and does. This is the essence of the play, all else can only be peripheral...

Silent Night

I have been promised an MP3 player as a Christmas present. I am eagerly anticipating the opportunity to listen to my favourite podcasts and music tracks. However, this prospect prompted me to consider how we do anything we can to avoid silence: 24 hour news coverage in my dentist's surgery, in-flight films, seasonal (albeit secular) songs on the supermarket tannoy, the noisy list goes on...

Silence is uncomfortable. In moments of quiet reflection, we are confronted with truths we would rather bury under decibels of noise. Yet it is often in the silent moments that God speaks to us, with His still small voice [1 Kings 19] [Dear Lord and Father of Mankind].

I'm no quaker, but the principle of silence in the presence of God is far more ancient than George Fox's Society of Friends. "Be still and know that I am God" [Psalm 46].

So, just as on the Stille Nacht of the first Christmas, the quiet shepherds received a message from heaven, I recommend we all spend some time in silence this Christmas, quietly waiting for the salvation of the Lord. As the shepherds discovered, we find salvation when we find the Saviour - Christ the Lord...

How silently, how silently
The wondrous gift is given
So God imparts to human hearts
The blessings of His heaven
No ear may hear His coming
But in this world of sin
Where meek souls will receive Him still
The dear Christ enters in.

Survival of the Unfittest

Darwin, Dawkins and Co advocate the principle of survival of the fittest. Whether or not we subscribe to this theory of natural selection, we must agree that it completely goes against the grain of human nature.

We do everything we can to promote the opposite effect - which here I call survival of the unfittest. Why else is there such outrage over species that are almost extinct? Only this week, there are reports of genome reconstruction for the woolly mammoth, long consigned to bio-history by natural selection.

Survival of the unfittest is most fiercely defended with regard to our fellow human beings. Equal opportunities effectively means positive discrimination in favour of the disadvantaged. How un-Darwinian this is! We instinctively seem to prefer Baron de Coubertin's "don't worry about winning, just take part" mentality that sees its ultimate fulfilment in the Paralympic Games.

I suggest that this compassionate equal-rights-for-all attitude springs from our "image-of-God" legacy. The Biblical creation record notes that God made man "in His image, after His likeness". Although sinful, miserable humanity little resembles the Divine Character, our equal opportunities movement is still "some feeble, pale reflection / of that pure love of Thine." [hymn]

Only God lifts beggars from rubbish tips and sets them among princes [1Sam2.8]. This is divine grace in action. He pays the price (in the sin-atoning death of Jesus Christ) to reconcile us to Himself. The price is paid for all, so the offer is available to all; even though none of us deserves it.

Spiritual Detox

Here's the problem: a Christian spends some time drifting away from his Lord and His Word. Apathy soon leads to active disobedience - and that Christian is suddenly in no fit condition to act effectively for God.

Here is one solution, which involves prayerfully reading through three detox chapters of the Bible.

1. Jonah 2 - Penitence
   
2. Psalm 67 - Passion
   
3. John 21 - Pardon
   

Penitence is first. Genuine sorrow for wrong motive, direction and/or action. Plenty of Bible passages apply, but I prefer Jonah's heartfelt prayer. He knew his disaster was entirely due to his own disobedience, and His recovery could only be accomplished by God's grace.

Passion is next. An earnest longing for God's presence, power and glory. Psalm 67 clearly cries out for this. So should we, whenever we feel its loss!

Pardon is last. With Christ's death and resurrection in mind, we know that pardon is possible in John 21. With Peter's denial and subsequent restoration, we are assured that personal pardon is bestowed by the Man who calls us, walks with us and directs us.

Combatting the McGospel Message Tendancy

I see the McGospel as a poor Gospel substitute - cheap flavour and colour, but no real substance to the message. Fast food, convenient, plenty of feel-good factor but little Biblical basis.

I think the McGospel has three vital ingredients missing. Add these in, and the message will become much more wholesome! However it becomes correspondingly more unpalatable to people who do not believe the Gospel ... "This is a hard saying, who can bear to hear it?"

1. Repentance
   
2. Blood
   
3. Hell
   

I know, each of these themes is unsavoury at first taste. Christians who would present the Gospel are so often tempted to gloss over these points so as to avoid alienating their sophisticated 21st century audiences. I regret to confess that I am more guilty than most.

So - let's tackle each ingredient one at a time. We want to uncover what they are, why they are so unpopular and yet why they are essential Gospel elements.

Repentance

The canonical example is Jesus' story of the Prodigal Son, cf Luke 15. The son spurns his father's home, wastes his inheritance and ends up lost, lonely and miserable. At his wit's end, he finally starts to think straight. He recognises how wrong he has been and is full of remorse for his faults. He thinks of his father, and decides to return to him. This is true repentance - sorrow for sin and a desire to express this to the Father personally. True repentance is always met with true forgiveness - that's a timeless truth.

Now we must consider why repentance is so unpopular in the McGospel generation. Basically, it involves bringing people to realise that they are wrong, mistaken, and far from God. Such revelation is untenable in this era of moral relativism and post-modernism. But this is God's way. It was the imperative of the first Gospel message (Acts 2), the first of Paul's two Ephesian footsteps ("repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ" - Acts 20).

Blood

Blood is live-supporting and life-saving. The Bible emphasizes this - "the life is in the blood" before any renaissance scientists like William Harvey published their (re) discoveries. The Biblical imagery of poured-out blood speaks of a life completely given in sacrifice. Christ's death brings us life, his blood brings us redemption - these are axioms of New Testament theology.

So why would people disdain such a notion today? They reject a Gospel message that presents the "precious blood of Christ" as a payment for sins (a self-propitiation on God's part, rather than appeasement from man). They reject Jesus' promise of a "new covanent in my blood which is shed for many" (a relationship with God in which all the responsibility is on his part). Blood sacrifice is deemed to be inappropriate, primitive and archaic.

God's standards remain uncompromised by regressions in human ethics and morality. Sin is always serious, in his book. Serious crime demands commensurate payment, and nothing has greater value than the life blood of his only Son. Ultimately, to refuse "redemption through his blood, forgiveness of sins according to the riches of his grace" is to accept full personal liability for sin against God - which brings us to the final point...

Hell

Remarkably, Jesus spoke more about the experience of hell than about heaven. Not because he had any pleasure in the contemplation of suffering, but rather because he wanted people to appreciate its stark and grim reality, and avoid it at all costs.

Today hell is ridiculed, if it ever surfaces as a discussion item at all.
How could a loving God send people to hell? God does not want anyone in hell - he would have all people to be saved. But a person who refuses God's terms and God's way effectively sentences himself to an eternity of hell.

To finish, think about this: Jesus suffered the infinite torture of hell, compressed into three hours of darkness as he was on the cross. I have accepted this personally, he is my substitute. He went through hell without me so he could be in heaven with me.

Me and You

Some people claim that Jesus' teachings are entirely egocentric. To a point, I can see what they mean. The conventional teacher explains a subject - some physical, philosophical, moral or spiritual aspect of the world around us. The teacher points his pupils to an object other than himself. But the Lord Jesus Christ was different. So often he would say "I am..." and make astonishing claims about Himself. The C.S. Lewis poached egg mad/bad/God argument is par for the course here.

However I would like to bring out a different point. In every case when the Lord Jesus made a personal claim, he always did it with a view to blessing others. When he said "I am the bread of life", He immediately offered Himself to those who were spiritually hungry and thirsty. When he said "I am the Way", he promised that those who came through Him would reach the Father. When he said "I am the Good Shepherd", he promised to give his life for those who would be his sheep.

Every supposedly egocentric teaching of the Messiah is really a "for me and thee" teaching. (ref) He explains something about himself, and then shows us how He can bless us. Is that egocentric? No, I would rather define it as his amazing grace!

Wise Men Still Seek Him

The magi were the academics of the ancient world. In many ways they exemplify good research practice.

First, they are looking for anomalous patterns in their astronomical observations. This is Oscar Wilde's 'modern intellect' that expects the unexpected, and won't let it drop till a suitable explanation is reached. So next consider their thorough literature search, which leads them to dig up Balaam's ancient prophecy from Numbers 24:17, and possibly Isaiah's words in Isaiah 60:1-5. Initial experiments and background reading now completed, they are prepared to stake their academic reputation, not to mention their undoubtedly meager research grant income, on a field-trip to an insignificant far-flung province of the Roman Empire.

After a long and arduous journey (which may have taken up to two years, by King Herod's calculations) they visit the palace. Initially this looks like being a red herring, until they attend the local university seminar series to discover a previously unknown citation (Micah 5:2).

And so to Bethlehem. At last they reach their objective
'Finding the place; it was (you may say) satisfactory.' [T.S. Eliot]


The point of this article is, perhaps a little wryly, to show that the educated elite came to find the baby of Bethlehem. They were just as keen as hoi polloi. They put aside their uncertainty and prejudice, and were rewarded beyond measure. I issue a plea to fellow academics of all disciplines: Will you make a similar journey of discovery this Christmas?

Positive Thinking

I recently discovered the positive atheism website, which is quite fascinating. Apart from several intemperate warnings against religious evangelists and apologists, it contains interesting viewpoints and quotations from leading atheist thinkers past and present.

The fundamental atheist tenet is "eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die," as the stereotypical rich fool says in Jesus' story. This is an ego-centric viewpoint. There seems to be little positive sentiment here!

A more noble thought is expressed in an alternative maxim - "non sibi sed omnibus" - not for self but for all. The "love your neighbour" principle is common to all major world faiths. It also crops up in many politico-philosophical systems from communism to humanism.

So, what does a positive Christian have to offer in reply? The most positive Christian I can think of is the apostle Paul. And his most positive statement is "emoi gar to zeen christos kai to apothanein kerdos." Loosely translated: As far as I'm concerned, living is all about Christ, and dying is even better.

Is this life's ideal? A purpose for the present and a hope for the future? A positive Christian attitude, for sure...

A Christian Opinion of Harry Potter

Pottermania swept across the county again this summer, with the release of the final book in the series. I confess that I have not read The Deathly Hallows as of yet, but I have enjoyed J.K. Rowling's earlier six novels.

Does the Harry Potter series glorify witchcraft? Does it promote anti-Christian values? Does it ...

Balance is essential in assessing such material. Consider two extreme approaches from New Testament times. First at Athens in Acts 17, Paul is heard to quote from two Greek poets, Epimedides and Aratus. So the exemplary convert to Christianity recycles pagan poetry in his sermons, when he feels it might be appropriate. Second at Ephesus in Acts 19, Paul's message leads the former wizards and witches to burn their spell books. This is testimony to all that their new-found faith in Christ is a life-changing experience.

So, what of pagan books? Quote them, or burn them? I should say the distinction lies in whether such books can be classified as literature or genuine evil. What of Harry Potter then? I think J.K. Rowling's genre must be somewhere between Athenian Poetry and Ephesian Black Magic. Therefore every Christian has to make an individual and intelligent choice about the matter. Also, I do not consider it right for me to criticise anyone else's choice. Finally the teaching of 1 Corinthians 10 and Romans 14 means that I should not let my decision cause offence to a fellow Christian in any way.

the mystery of life

Every day when I walk into work, I go past a red post box upon which someone has scrawled the word meaningless in large letters. I doubt this is the graffiti artist's impression of the Great British Postal Service. I rather interpret it to be his concise impression of life itself. Alas! How post-modern, post-Darwin, post-Dawkins philosophies have robbed us of a sense of purpose, whether individually or globally or on any intermediate scale.

So is life meaningless? It certainly seems to be so, at times. Even the greatest ancient intellect came to this conclusion (see Ecclesiastes chapter 1, for instance). However I would contend that life may often appear to be meaningless, because it is always puzzling. I know plenty of contemporary Christian teaching follows this line of argument ... God is the missing peace in your life's jigsaw puzzle. Nicky Gumbel et al(pha!) present this most eloquently. Another scheme (local to Manchester) is the Riddle of Life.

But I want to turn this allegory upside-down. God is not just the "missing piece" or even "missing peace" in your life's jigsaw puzzle. Rather, you are a missing piece in his intricate celestial puzzle. This seems more consistent with Jesus' presentation in Luke 15 - his lost sheep, lost coin, lost son trilogy of stories.

Of course, the fact that God has personally come to find us (through his Son) does not absolve us of the responsibility of searching for Him. This is precisely the message Paul presented to the pre-modern, pre-Darwin, pre-Dawkins society of Athens (Acts 17).

Which brings me neatly to my final point. Let me share with you one of my favourite Bible verses. It is a promise from Almighty God Himself, in Jeremiah 29.13 - "You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart."

Today

The Today programme on BBC Radio 4 grills politicians, academics, lawyers et al on a daily basis. The intimidating presenters never seem to be lost for words! As each specialist arrives, the presenters greet them with a barrage of insightful questions.

It reminds me of the scene in Matthew 22. The Lord Jesus is in Jerusalem, his Messianic credentials are being examined closely by the authorities. Three different groups of people ask him "old chestnut" questions, to which they are sure there cannot be right answers ... and the Messiah confounds them all!

First up, the political question. "Should we pay taxes to Caesar?" What an issue to raise in Jerusalem, hotbed of Jewish fundamentalism and yet centre of occupying Roman administration! He would have to offend someone, whether he answered yes or no. So what did He reply? "Give Caesar what belongs to him. Give God what belongs to Him." Wow! That's more than playing with a straight bat! That's knocking the hapless interrogators for six!

Second, the hypothetical question. Rather more academic. "If a woman is widowed seven times, after marrying seven brothers one-at-a-time, who will she be married to in the resurrection?" (Questioner almost falls over laughing ... how ridiculous to consider the resurrection to be anything more than metaphorical!) The sniggers soon stop. The Messiah sternly points out that God describes Himself as "I am the God of Abraham," 400 years after Abraham's death. Abraham lives! God is the God of the living! Not the dead! Resurrection is literal. Life is eternal. Marriage is only temporary, unnecessary in heaven.

Third, the legal question. "Which is the greatest of God's laws?" asks an earnest lawyer. "Love God," says the Messiah, the only one who ever lived up to this law. And there's more ... "Love your neighbour," says the Messiah, the one who showed the greatest neighbourly love when He gave His life up so that His fellow humans could have their sins forgiven by His Father God.

No more questions from the audience. The Messiah has silenced his critics.

Gospel Haiku

Christ died for our sins
From the grave He rose again
Jesus Christ is Lord

Notes

This haiku is a celebration of the Christian message
of Easter. The first line is taken from 1 Corinthians 15:3, which Paul states as the basic truth of his evangelistic message. The middle line is a paraphrase of 1 Corinthians 15:4, regarding the resurrection which is a central tenet of the Christian faith. ("If Christ is not alive, your faith is meaningless" - Paul again - 1 Corinthians 15:17.) The final line is a direct quotation from Philippians 2:10-11.

The haiku follows the traditional syllabic pattern of 5/7/5, based on the Japanese hokku pattern. I hope this shows that the Christian message can (and must) be relayed across the world with respect to cultural conventions, although without compromising the raw power of the Gospel.

Each line describes a Christian belief that is firmly embedded in history. (1) Christ died on the cross at Calvary. (2) He rose from the dead three days later. No-one disputes that the tomb was empty! Although unbelievers have attempted to perpetrate alternative explanations, the original resurrection story still withstands careful scrutiny. (3) One day everyone will have to acknowledge the universal dominion of Jesus Christ. God has appointed this future day already. Some will bow grudgingly as a precursor to their judgment. Others will bow willingly in anticipation of His kingdom.

God and recursive acronyms

Note: this article is aimed fairly and squarely at computer scientists and hackers. Apologies to everyone else.

The free software movement abounds with recursive acronyms. Examples include GNU's Not Unix, PNG's Not GIF, etc. Some people see this kind of circular definition as poetical. Others prefer the mathematical intractability. Either way, recursion is symbolic of both complexity and beauty.

God, when describing Himself, employs recursive naming schemes. Consider Moses' meeting with God [Exodus 3], familiar to both Jewish and Christian faiths. When Moses asks God, "What is Your Name?" then God replies "I AM WHO I AM." God's character is incomparable with anyone other than Himself. I AM WHO I AM brings before us God's uniqueness, constancy and eternity...

God also defines His emotions recursively. He describes why He has chosen to rescue the Israelite people from Egypt [Deuteronomy 7]. He says "I love you ... because I love you." God is love, and this is the only reason He needs to love. God's love is determined entirely by the subject, not at all the object, of that love.

So, is this recursive, infinite God entirely unknowable to humanity? No! Jesus Christ, the Son of God, came to tell us who "I AM" really is, and to show us what "I LOVE" really means...

Why Jesus?

Up to now I have never actually explained why Jesus is "my kind of Messiah". Here are three reasons why I choose Jesus as my Lord and my God...

Jesus cares

How many times have I walked past a beggar on the street today? At least twice, each time fiercely staring at the pavement in front of me, desperately avoiding eye contact. The Lord Jesus Christ was never like that. He stopped to chat with beggars, much to the disgust of his more affluent audience.

But Jesus did more than just ignore social barriers. He removed them altogether, restoring genuine equality and social justice. Whereas Robin Hood robbed from the rich to give to the poor, the Lord Jesus gives to rich and poor alike from his own spiritual riches. "Blessed are the poor, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to them" he says.

Jesus challenges

He questioned the values of contemporary society. Apathy, hypocrisy, mockery. Whatever preconceived notions people had about him and his message, he made those people think again. They marvelled at his authoritative words, his diplomatic statement of outrageous truth. Read the words of Jesus again and see if they challenge you!

Jesus changes

Most famously, he turned water into wine. His followers clearly abandoned the task of exhaustively recording his full list of miracles (John 20.30). His greatest transformation takes place in people's hearts. He brought new life to so many people in that day. And he's still in the same business today. "If any man be in Christ he is a new creature altogether. The old has gone, the new has arrived!"

Advent Calendar

It's that time of year again! Everyone is counting down to Christmas! In our house we have a traditional picture calendar, not a chocolate in sight I'm afraid! It's rather unsophisticated - in this age of edible advent calendars, electronic advent calendars, and so on.

I like the picture on the front of our calendar. There is a manger under an open sky. Mary and Joseph are alone with the baby. The first Christmas was an unsophisticated affair. And yet, behind the simplicity of the event, what an amazing spiritual significance. Immanuel - God is with us!