Song of Songs

Unless you are convinced that you live in a mechanical universe, driven by chance and logic, where every action and thought and feeling is predetermined and you have eliminated from your soul all notions of love, reading Song of Songs will take your breath away.

It is too sensuous, surely, for the Bible. Too racy for a theologian. Too poetic to be true. Too exasperating to satisfy. Too rooted in history to be allegorical.

Solomon, in all his riches and might is overcome with love for a swarthy young Lebanese woman, who is self-conscious about her tanned skin having been mistreated by her brothers and forced to spend too long in the sun tending the sheep. Nevertheless, Solomon is love-struck, and there’s no turning back. Equally, the Shulamite is overcome with desire and love for her beloved, King Solomon. And she is not the only woman after Solomon.

The language is excessive and relentless and, if you’ve read SoS before, you’ll know that periodically throughout its eight chapters, the two lovers seem to be at the point of consummating their love when one or the other disappears leaving the other bereft with longing. A repeated phrase ‘do not stir up, nor awaken love, until it pleases’ is the book’s standard response.

Song of Songs has many interpretations, all of which can be true because this is a study of love. Therefore it can be applied to God’s relationship with Israel, or Christ’s relationship with the church, called His bride in the New Testament, or simply the nature of romantic love itself.

But I want to look at two passages in SoS and contrast the Shulamite’s explorations of the city after sunset – chapter 3 v1-4 and chapter 5 v 2-8

On my bed by night
I sought him whom my soul loves;
I sought him, but found him not.
I will rise now and go about the city,
in the streets and in the squares;
I will seek him whom my soul loves.
I sought him, but found him not.
The watchmen found me
as they went about in the city.
“Have you seen him whom my soul loves?”
Scarcely had I passed them
when I found him whom my soul loves.
I held him, and would not let him go

Ch 3 v 1-4

I slept, but my heart was awake.
A sound! My beloved is knocking.
My beloved put his hand to the latch,
and my heart was thrilled within me.
I arose to open to my beloved,
but my beloved had turned and gone.
I sought him, but found him not;
I called to him, but he gave no answer.
The watchmen found me
as they went about in the city;
they beat me, they bruised me,
I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem,
that you tell him; I am sick with love.

Ch 5 v 2-8

Despite the consistent theme of love between Solomon and the Shulamite, there are some obvious differences. In chapter three, the Shulamite is on her bed but awake, whereas in chapter five, she is asleep and dreaming. In chapter 3 she ventures out after dark into the city to find the king, encounters the watchmen who don’t bother her, then finds the king, and won’t let him go. In chapter 5, however, she is mistreated by the watchmen who wound her, and, despite her best efforts, she fails to find him.

My argument is this: love may be ecstatic, but it is not static.

For the sake of this interpretation, King Solomon is the Son of David and therefore a ‘type’ of Christ, and the Shulamite woman is either the church or any individual who finds Christ so attractive, and the love of God so overwhelming that all resistance is relinquished and true Christianity, true spirituality, has been birthed in the life of the believer.

As is often said, true Christianity is not a religion, it’s a relationship.

If we’re familiar with the New Testament, the term usually employed to describe followers of Christ is disciple’ meaning ‘apprentice’ rather than ‘student’.

Apprentice

The point is this: disciples learn. They become like their master, ending up thinking and living and operating like Him. If we translate this discipleship model into the love dimension of Song of Songs we see a similar progression, particularly from chapter 3 to chapter 5.

By the time we reach chapter 3, the Shulamite has left Lebanon and is living in Jerusalem. The King comes and goes and on this particular night, the Shulamite has retired for the night but can’t sleep ‘At night, on my bed, I sought the one I love, I sought him, but I did not find him’. She has loved him from a distance and has even moved from Lebanon, but the time has come to find him. This is often the state of mind of a person who has heard of Jesus of Nazareth, the Messiah, the Christ, and is profoundly moved, and drawn to Him, but no personal relationship has begun.

The critical point is whether she will continue in that state of dissatisfaction or do something about it. Such is her love for Solomon that she breaks through the social mores of the day (not too different from now) and goes out into the dark streets to look for him. It takes time ‘I will rise now and go about the city, in the streets, and in the squares’; she doesn’t give up.

Finally, she finds him ‘I found the one I love, I held him and would not let him go’. The unbeliever who is attracted to Christ has crossed a line and left everything familiar to find Him; nothing else will do.

In terms of this argument, the relationship has truly begun.

But later, we read chapter five and wonder at the contrast with chapter three. The sweet violins and love described in chapter three are displaced by the suffering and separation of chapter five. How is this part of our discipleship as believers?

First, we see that the Shulamite has fallen asleep. In the Bible, sleep is synonymous with death.

In sleep or death we cannot love or live, we are rendered inert. Mystics may use the phrase ‘the dark night of the soul’ as a common experience for believers who love the Lord and yet hit the buffers and everything seems to vanish, be absent, withdrawn, including the felt love of the Christ. Doctrinally, the believer comes to a new point of revelation that when Christ died so did they. Paul puts it like this: ‘I have been crucified with Christ, it is no longer I who live but Christ who lives in me, the life I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God who loved me and gave Himself for me’ Gal 2v20

In the middle of receiving this revelation, the disciple may feel like he or she may need to go back and repeat the same ‘conversion experience’ of chapter 3 i.e. to rise up and go about the city in the dark looking for the King. But this time it all goes terribly wrong. The watchmen, who were previously indifferent, are now aggressive: ‘The watchmen who went about the city found me, struck me, they wounded me…took my veil away’. Like the Shulamite, we cry out, often to friends, ‘If you find my beloved tell him I am lovesick’.

We may not use such romantic language but, in essence, all we feel is the absence of Christ who seemed so close. We are wounded, stripped of everything that once seemed to be created by our love for the King, for Christ.

What is this? It is a test. A test of faith, of love, and the combination of love and faith: faithfulness.

‘The watchmen who went about the city found me, struck me, they wounded me…took my veil away’

How will the Shulamite respond? She is asleep, inert. She has failed in her attempts to find the King, her beloved. All seems to be lost. At the point of her greatest weakness, she turns a corner and understands that her love for the King cannot be sustained by her own love. Her love failed to find him. She has come to a new realisation, that the love that sustains their relationship; the faith, the love, and the faithfulness, all that is needed, is found in Solomon.

In terms of Galatians 2v20 ‘the life I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God’. The relationship between believer and Christ is not dependent even on the faith of the believer, but His faith; the One who loved him in the first place.

She cries out, this time not from seeing the sun in all its glory but at night, knowing that although she cannot make the sun move to her, the sun is still shining beyond her horizons. She confesses, ‘My beloved is…chief amongst ten thousand…he is altogether lovely…my beloved has gone to his garden’

The Shulamite has reached a new juncture in her relationship with her beloved, Solomon, the king. She doesn’t have to strive. She has learnt to trust. Whether Solomon is away in his garden, close by her side, or sharing her bed (yes, Song of Songs is surprisingly intimate), his love for her is constant and immeasurable. And so, when she trusts in this, she finds that his love has so filled her, that she has found a new buoyancy. A new source of buoyancy may be more accurate.

Finally, to root this in the New Testament, Paul’s letters to Romans, Galatians, and Colossians make the same progression.

• Romans chapters 1-5 deal with our new-found relationship with God through Christ - the ‘justification by faith’ chapters. But then we hit chapters 6 and 7.

‘Do you not know that as many of us as were baptised into Christ were baptised into His death?...knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Christ…’ ch 6v3,6

• Galatians chapter 1 and most of 2 deal with the start of our relationship with Christ but then we read the verse above Gal 2v20.

• In Colossians, the opening two chapters deal with conversion to Christ, then we read ‘For you died and your life is hidden in Christ in God and when Christ who is our life…’ Col 3v3,4

Jesus taught the same progression.

In the early days of the disciples’ faith and following of Christ Jesus said, ‘God so loved the world that He gave His only Son that whoever believes in Him may not perish but have everlasting love’ John 3v16

In passing, SO loved. Just like Solomon’s love for the Shulamite woman. And just like the Shulamite woman, self-conscious of her dark skin. the effect on her of being in the fields too long, so, as lovers of Christ, we are painfully aware of our imperfections and cannot quite believe that God should even have a passing interest in us let alone SO love us. And yet that is what Jesus taught. You and I are SO loved by God.

We may, at this point believe that our relationship to God, our lover, depends on our faith to believe, or our ability to love. And that is our experience. The disciples, like the Shulamite, rose up and followed Christ. The fishermen left their nets. Matthew left his money-changing table. Simon the Zealot, a terrorist dedicated to the military overthrow of the Romans, stopped attending weapons training camps, and so on.

But then, shortly before Jesus’s arrest, he teaches the disciples the lesson they are about to learn by bitter experience.

‘I am the vine, you are the branches…the branch cannot bear fruit by itself…without Me you can do nothing…you did not choose Me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should bear fruit; fruit that remains’ John 15 v 1-16

This is a terrible blow to our pride and ego if we think for one moment that it is our faith, our love, our dedication, or our passion that is required to be a Christian, to follow Christ. Everything in us cries out ‘No, Lord. I chose you. You are so wonderful, I left everything to follow you!’ But less than a few days later, after Jesus was arrested, they all ran away, failures. Peter tries to follow but ends up denying Christ three times before the cock crows, and weeps bitter tears when Jesus turns to look at him.

If you are a Christian believer, you may have faced this switch and realised that even the relationship you thought you had with God through your love for Christ is an apparition. The woman, the Shulamite, is convinced it was her love that found the king. But it turns out that after she fell asleep her love was insufficient and she was injured in her failed attempt to find the king, just as Peter’s failed attempt to be faithful to Christ caused him such bitter tears.

The true gospel is this: that we needed to die so that all that self-generated love and faith could be crucified with Christ. To be biblical, our connection with Adam and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil could be forever severed, and we could be transferred to the source of true life, love, and faith – the tree of life i.e. Christ Himself.

Now, at last, we have reached the Sabbath. No more work. No self-generated Christianity.

Any and all of the fruit we may bear springs from One source.

The wonderful news of the Good News, or gospel, for Peter who wept and the disciples who all failed, is that the other side of our failure is His love. The woman was right. Even though all seemed lost, even though the king may be in his garden, His love is better than wine.

The final two verses in the Song of Solomon are like two texts, short and yet convey everything.

Solomon first:

‘You who are in your garden, I have told my companions to listen for your voice…but let ME hear it!’

The woman replies:

‘Flee to me, my beloved, be like a gazelle, or a young stag, on the mountains of spices.’

Transfiguration transfigured

If we are, as is often argued, created in the image of God, then embodied in this creation is an potential to experience all that God is.

In essence, when God became flesh in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, everything that He was in Himself, and displayed to the world, is in-built in us. And that includes transfiguration.

If we have viewed the transfiguration as recorded in the gospels as a ‘one-off’, abnormal, unique experience not only in time and space, but restricted to the Son of Man, perhaps we should re-assess transfiguration?

To begin, we must realise that as much as the three disciples permitted to be with Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration, were not transfigured, it was not Jesus alone whose clothes appeared to be whiter than white, but those belonging to Moses and Elijah also.

Could, therefore, anyone be transfigured? The answer surely is Yes, but it is not in our power to transfigure ourselves. The more recent misuse of the word ‘manifest’ has caused disarray among limited, broken, frail men and women who cannot accept the limitations of their own humanity.

The point is not whether we can switch transfiguration on or off as if we’re in control of our destiny – destiny measured in these next few minutes or as in life’s destiny in fulfilment of dreams or the grave. The point is that we carry in our ‘in-the-image-of-God-nature’ the normality of transfiguration in the same way that gentle poppy plants explode their seed pods, or Rousseau’s philosophy allowed him to moralize about children yet abuse his own, or that atheistic communism led to the rivers of blood of all who dared to oppose their dictatorships, or that the telescope led to Neil Armstrong’s ‘One small step for man…’ quote in 1969.

we carry in our ‘in-the-image-of-God-nature’ the normality of transfiguration in the same way that gentle poppy plants explode their seed pods

My contention is that we human spirit-mud-pies encounter transfiguration in the mundane. We have an unquenchable ability to glorify even the most cruel and tragic events in our history. Somehow, we recreate suffering as poetry, art, sculpture, song, and literature…in ways that please us to the core. Money changes hands and queues form at art galleries, theatres, or the daubed walls of the next Banksy.

This is as disturbing as it is it is not.

What is disturbing is, surely, that disturbance is displaced by beauty or pleasure, even exultant feelings and emotions and love. This morning, for example, the sun streamed through a twisted array of light brown branches stripped clean of buds, flowers, and fruits by winter. Somehow, my mind saw the twisted branches illuminated so beautifully as the crown of thorns pressed into the scalp of Jesus by Pilate’s aggressive guards during his arrest and interrogation. Even though the sun and the branches transported me to those terrible moments of pain, the sight itself was unexpectedly beautiful, and its beauty displaced the abhorrent cruelty.

I feel this has something to do with transfiguration – at least from our very human end of the telescope.

A similar example – and one well-worn argument – is decorative silver, platinum, gold, or wooden crosses worn as a necklace. A crucifix, of course, is an instrument of terrible public shame and grotesque torture…and yet we seem able to transform its evil, barbaric reality into an attractive object sold by the million.

There are limits to this innate transfiguration. It would be repellent and shocking if we wore models of silver or gold gas ovens of the Third Reich as mere trinkets.

Somehow, we have ‘unseen’ the equivalent cruelty of crucifixes.

When the two jets slammed into the Twin Towers on September 11th 2001 at 8.46 and 9.03 killing 2753 persons in New York, I watched a tv screen, like millions of others as the tragedy unfolded. I was teaching at the time and word rapidly spread amongst the staff. At break, we gathered in the staff room. No one spoke a word. And yet, I couldn’t remove the blue sky, the sunshine and the Manhattan skyline. A beautiful morning. I have never spoken about this. Why? Shame? Yes, a little. Did these feelings of beauty diminish my sense of the horror? Not at all. But when I remember 9/11 I cannot separate the colours from the killing.

_______________________

Perhaps we can make sense of this as we return to the New Testament accounts of the Transfiguration in Matthew 17, Mark 9, and Luke 9.

Whereas Matthew and Mark’s account infer the nature of the conversation between Jesus, Moses and Elijah, Luke’s states it plainly:

‘Two men talked with Him, Moses and Elijah who appeared in glory and spoke of His departure which He was about to accomplish in Jerusalem.’

In Matthew and Mark, Jesus speaks to Peter, John, and James – the disciples he took with Him to the mountain:

‘The Son of Man is…about to suffer at their hands’

We are presented with a juxtaposition of glory and suffering. The whiter-than-white glory and the utter defeat of death itself in resurrection rammed up against the impending cruel death on a cross at the hands of the Romans. The New Testament does not permit us to separate the glory of the Transfiguration from the nails hammered through the wrists and feet of the Son of Man.

Anglicans recite these words every Sunday:

‘I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ…who for us men and our salvation came down from heaven…and was made man, and was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, He suffered and was buried and the third day he rose again…and ascended into heaven’

What God did in the Transfiguration of Jesus, Moses, and Elijah and the resurrection and ascension of Jesus none of us can ‘manifest’ by an act of our will. Nevertheless precisely because God did, it follows that there are at least some echoes of Transfiguration in our human make-up, created as we are in the image of God.

The New Testament does not permit us to separate the glory of the Transfiguration from the nails hammered through the wrists and feet of the Son of Man

So we should not be surprised to find suffering and glory closely related. Nor should we dismiss their co-existence by resorting to condemnation or guilt. That desire to convert a crucifix into jewellery is perhaps a mirror image of God’s willingness to transfigure Jesus prior to His suffering and the death He was destined to accomplish…His ‘departure’.

Lastly, perhaps another important lesson from all three accounts is to come to terms with the contrast between the Transfigured Jesus, Moses, and Elijah and the stumbling, awkward reactions of the other trio – Peter, John, and James.

This side of death, moments of transfiguration will always – it seems - take us by surprise.

Ecclesiastes – not for the faint-hearted

I’m reading through Ecclesiastes…it’s better read with a Monty Python smirk and a smile, as if humour itself is the only comfort blanket remaining that can disguise the relentless realism and gloom: ‘Looking on the Bright Side of Life, it is not.

This morning I read a verse that halted me in its tracks, and I suppose I’m using this post as a first attempt to grapple with its stark simplicity, to put it into a test-tube and analyse the death out of it.  

‘If you see the oppression of the poor, and the violent perversion of justice, and righteousness in a province, do not marvel at the matter, for high official watches over high official, and higher officials are over them’ 6 v 8 

Tradition points the finger at Solomon as the author. Whether he was or was not is inconsequential; the Hebrew title suggests that the author was a speaker who had the authority to call a congregation together to listen to him droning on about vanity and how life ends the same for everyone, rich or poor, and that if you think differently, you’re ‘grasping for the wind’.

It is not the cheeriest book in the bible.

At first sight, this appears to support indifference

But the phrase in the verse about the oppression of the poor that struck me was ‘do not marvel at the matter’. At first sight, this appears to support indifference, as if nothing can or should be done to rescue the poor and the weak from the hands of the rich, powerful, well-healed thugs that run society.

If that were true it would be shocking.

No, that way is defeatist, and I have no doubt that Solomon – once the truth had emerged of the depth of the corruption ruining the poor in a particular province - would have acted decisively.

This happens today. In every society. As the author of Ecclesiastes in the ninth verse of his opening chapter: ‘There is nothing new under the sun’.

Sir William Macpherson used the memorable phrase ‘Institutional Racism’ in his report on the grossly inadequate investigation carried out by the Met into Stephen Lawrence’s murder: "The collective failure of an organisation to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture, or ethnic origin. It can be seen or detected in processes, attitudes and behaviour that amount to discrimination through prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness, and racist stereotyping which disadvantage minority ethnic people.”

Whole provinces, Police forces, or…any hierarchical institution, can sink into corruption aided and abetted by the hierarchical power structures designed to lift up the least and the weakest, but rotten to the core.

Deep breath…let’s attempt to apply this verse to Israel-Gaza-Washington.

Hamas, in my opinion, has long since forfeited its legitimacy as a governing body. It did so by authorising and carrying out the despicable attack on unarmed citizens of Israel on October 7th 2023 at the Supernova Music Festival and kibbutzim, murdering over 1000 and kidnapping 250 taking them hostage; men, women, and children.

The only acceptable recourse for Hamas was to hang their heads in shame, return the hostages, and leave Gaza. Instead, they brought untold misery to the ordinary citizens under their control and the poor under their care, promising to repeat their attacks on Israelis inside and outside of Gaza, and continuing to war against the inevitable military response from the IDF.

But I am humbled by this verse in Ecclesiastes ‘Do not marvel at the matter’. What happened on October 7th should not surprise us. So deep has run the sense of injustice in the veins of ordinary Palestinians following the events in 1948 and the creation of the State of Israel that, I fear, so many have succumbed to an ever-narrowing set of options to resolve their grievances.

In the aftermath of World War II there were those in Britain that, due to their direct and indirect suffering, could not overcome their hatred for Germans and could no longer differentiate between the Nazis and Germans or Germany…after all, it was ordinary Germans that donned the uniform of the Wehrmacht, the Luftwaffe, the German Navy and the SS. Those, however, who lost the ability to make that distinction, died with bitterness running through their veins. Thankfully, most who opposed Nazi Germany were able to hate the Nazis but not all Germans and relations between GB and Germany were quickly restored, and the wound healed.

That, surely, is the only path ahead for Israel and Gaza.

Whether the Metropolitan Police Force has put its own house in order only time will tell. The world waits to see what can be done to rebuild Gaza and to build trust between Jews and Palestinians.

I don’t know whether it can be achieved. Hard-line Palestinians - and those chanting ‘From the River to the Sea’ on our streets - are calling for a One State solution – the replacement of Israel with a Palestinian State i.e. Jews out!

And hard-line Ultra-Orthodox Jews are calling for the expulsion of Palestinians from Gaza and the West Bank which they wish to rename as Judea and Samaria.

So entrenched are both sides with their respective hierarchical power structures firmly embedded by democratic elections

President Trump has waded in with customary bluster and shaken the world, seemingly adding Gaza to his shopping list of Greenland and Panama.

So entrenched are both sides with their respective hierarchical power structures firmly embedded by democratic elections (44% of Gazans voted for Hamas; 23% voted for Likud – Netanyahu’s party who formed a coalition government) that we must be as realistic as the writer of Ecclesiastes and ‘do not marvel’ if this stalemate continues with further outbreaks of devastating violence.

Is there any hope? Any light?

The following verse, chapter 5 verse 9, offers not only a relief from the apparent inevitability of v8 but presents a vision for the future:

‘The profit of the land is for all, even the king is served from the land’

We watch, maybe with more or less hope, as these cease-fire days build. Much depends on who is in charge and not only who but what sort of administration: one that does everything for the sake of ‘all’ Gazans and ‘all’ Israelis, or one that cares not a jot about the poor, preferring to line its own pockets, disguising its true intent by attempting once again to stir the devotion and sacrifice of its people through blood-lust, coercion and oppression.

Am I referring to Hamas, or Washington, or Jerusalem? I have my views. And it’s not from a journalistic perspective, or historical, or political perspective that I have had a go at putting these two verses from Ecclesiastes in my analytical test tube. If I lean close to that test tube, I can hear the sound of the reaction…the heavy sighs of lament.

In another place, St Paul wrote these words:

‘We do not know what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered’

That seems to be an appropriate note to end on. God, the Holy Spirit, is not indifferent and through our inarticulate prayers perhaps we are more on course than we realise. Groanings, sighs, pursed lips, tears even – Jesus wept – maybe this is our vital contribution and may help to shift the whole picture from verse 8 to verse 9.

‘We do not know what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered’

I hope so.

As I said at the start, Ecclesiastes is not for the faint-hearted. It tells the truth even if the truth is a hard pill to swallow.

Flowers

You stand there with half-flowers
Hidden behind your back
One eye glistening, the other
Flooded with immeasurable joy

Whilst I fuss and chatter
Battering you with
Requests I think you’d
Like to grant me

Exhausted by your silence
Eventually
After decades
I stop talking

And look up
And see your glistening eye
And the other, an ocean
For me to swim in

Only then can you surprise me,
A man, with flowers, half-flowers
Dressed in colours I’d never seen
Some already gone to seed

You hold them out to me
Silent me. Before I take them
I close my eyes and bask
In scents from another world

Then, I take the flowers
And wonder about the seeds?
And finally, I know
What lies there, behind your eyes

A Bus Journey

Top deck affords its randomly selected members
With eyes from steamed-up windows
One wipe with the back of a finger
Restores sight to view the world below

Two women, smiling, hug on the high street
A lady transported by the book she is reading
A man, impaired by less of a knee than when he was young
Making his way, shopping in a rucksack slung

And I, earbuds in, listening to a podcast:
Deitrich Bonhoeffer’s imperfect
But uniquely courageous
Opposition to the Nazi horror

Makes me wonder if I have eyes to see?
I wipe the window one more time
There is the departed Waterstones,
Its logo not quite brushed clean off

It’s raining icy splinters now
The rain gurgling its way to open drains
Each raindrop making a soft landing
The cold gnawing at my bones

The awkwardness of us in the rain
Dipping into pockets and wallets
Deep inside large cumbersome coats
Searching for library cards, bus passes, phones…

And a young man slumped on the seat
Leaning down to re-tie his wet
Unusually wide, very white Converse laces
All of us, heads down, quieter than usual

In Bristol we say ‘Thank you, Drive’
Then it’s off, following the feet
Of the one who alighted before,
Carrying two books, hidden from the rain

I stop at the corner shop, the owner’s Alsatian
Objects to me spending money
Always gives me a fright
Home now, book open, dry trousers on

Socks of Merino Wool

Trump is in the White House
Musk is on the Moon
Washington at minus nine
Did a chill travel down
Your left-wing spine
Or are your feet a-dancing
Your heart full of hope
As we walk into the future
Along an uncertain
Political tightrope?

There’s Gaza to rebuild
Hostages to repair
Putin to, frankly, stop
Ukraine’s wounds to heal
From years of bloody warfare
And let’s not forget
We were all slaves in Egypt
Refugees in a foreign land
So let’s give our neighbours
An open heart; a helping hand

Yes, Trump is in the White House
And Musk is on the Moon
It’s time for a cup of tea
We’ve made it thus far
We’ve made it to noon
And I’ve made a decision
To celebrate life to the full
To fill my glass with bubbles
Wear socks of Merino wool
And sing the praises of the King
And good old John Bull.

Wrong End of the Telescope? Via Dolorosa

From a child’s perspective, there is no wrong end of a telescope or binoculars…they are just playing and enjoying the world close up and far away.

A few years ago, at Easter, I spent a week travelling around Israel. After an evening in Jerusalem, I embarked on a tour, thanks to a friend-cum-guide, first to Philippi then up to the Golan heights and a couple of nights in Galilee, before driving down the Jordan Valley, floating in the Dead Sea, and back to Jerusalem, to spend a few days wandering round the old city.

Whilst walking through the narrow streets I got caught up in a surge of tourists and devotees following the Via Dolorosa, the Way of The Cross, or the Way of Suffering. Some groups were wearing the same-coloured hats or in a group trying to keep the flag on a pole leader in view. The procession, organised by the Catholic church, attracted maybe a thousand walking from one ‘Station of the Cross’ to the next, supposedly following the route taken by Jesus, from the site of his arrest and interrogation to the crucifixion, and burial. Some traditions add a further ‘station’ to celebrate the resurrection.

What has this to do with telescopes?

And why is a good Protestant believer bothering to write a blog about the Stations of the Cross – normally the reserve of Catholics or the Orthodox?

Often we see the events that took place from one end of the telescope…but there is another end and perspective on the stations of the cross.

In short, the ‘normal’ way for believers is to go beyond weeping over the injustice of his arrest and conviction and suffering to believing that Jesus as the Messiah (or Christ) went to the cross for us, in our place, taking the punishment we deserved, so that we, the guilty, could be forgiven and acquitted before God.

Isaiah among other Jewish prophets had seen these events in advance:

‘He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief…surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows…wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement for our peace was upon him…he poured out his soul unto death and bore the sin of many’ Isaiah 53v3-12

This end of the theological telescope is referred to as substitutionary atonement. Substitutionary because He died on the cross instead of me, the judgement I deserved He took upon Himself on the cross. And atonement, because the result of this debt being paid on my behalf is our broken relationship with God is healed, so we are at-one-ment with God.

When I first heard this message of grace – that God loves us and all this is freely available, all God wants is for us to believe and receive it as a gift; to abandon (repent) of any attempt to try and be good enough for God. I used to say ‘This is too good to be true. There must be a catch?’ But there isn’t. Jesus said, ‘Freely you have received freely give’.

God has shown His love for us sending His Son to die for us and be raised to life again so that we can be forgiven and brought back into a relationship with God – the bible calls this the gift of eternal life. ‘Life’ or ‘Zoe’ in Greek, means God’s own life, which is eternal and indestructible.

Substitutionary atonement as wonderful as it is, is half of the gospel message; the good news that Jesus preached.

The New Testament teaches that once someone has let go of their own life and trusted that Christ died in their place and experienced the gifts of forgiveness and eternal life, they are placed ‘in Christ’ - Christianity is not a human being believing in an external Christ.

This is a phraseology not well understood in our Western culture. The Bible is interested in who we are ‘in’. For example, Levi was said to have been ‘in the loins of Abraham’ ie a descendant of Abraham, or ‘in Abraham’ and therefore everything that Abraham did, Levi did. So, when Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek, Levi paid tithes to Melchizedek, even though as a priest he was used to receiving tithes.

‘Levi, who received tithes, paid tithes through Abraham…for he was in the loins of Abraham’ Hebrews 7v 9,10

Jesus taught that, as believers we would be ‘in Him’ just as He was ‘in’ the Father.

‘Do you not believe I am in the Father and the Father in Me…the Father who dwells in me does the works’ John 14v10,11

And later, in the same chapter Jesus continues:

‘The Spirit…will be in you…a little while longer and…you will know that I am in my Father and you in Me, and I in you’ John 14v 17,20

‘If anyone loves me, he will keep my word and my Father will love him and We will come and make our home with him’ v 23

The apostles that followed Christ preached the same message that as believers we are ‘in Christ’ and ‘Christ is in us’ and therefore we were included in all the events from the arrest to the cross and the resurrection – we were not spectators.

Substitutionary atonement as wonderful as it is, is half of the gospel message; the ‘good news’ that Jesus preached

This is called ‘inclusive atonement’ and is the teaching of the New Testament alongside substitutionary substitution.

Traditionally, there are 13 ‘stations of the cross’ marking steps along the journey of Christ from arrest to burial. There are minor variations from tradition to tradition and most do not include Resurrection. I shall concentrate on the stations in bold.

Jesus is arrested and condemned to death
Jesus takes up his Cross

Jesus is stripped of his garments and nailed to the Cross
Jesus dies on the Cross

Jesus is laid in the tomb
Resurrection

He suffered all these ‘stations’ for us and did it alone and yet, by virtue of being ‘in Christ’ we were included and participated in these events, 2000 years ago in Jerusalem.

You were arrested by Christ
You were stripped and nailed to a cross
You died
You were buried
You were raised

Arrested

For many who become believers, or come to Christ, or ‘find faith’ - whatever phrase is used - their experience is like an arrest.

Paul wrote the following words: ‘Not that I have already attained or am already perfected, but I press on that I may lay hold of (arrest) that for which Christ Jesus lay hold of (arrested) me’ Philip 3v12

Famously, for Paul, he was ‘arrested’ on the road to Damascus. No two believers hadve the same experience and yet each one is like an arrest…even is it is with love!

Stripped and nailed to the cross

The disciples had to let go of their nets to follow Christ – stripped of their identity as fishermen. We have to let go of the nets ‘nets’ we’re holding on to, is we are to follow Christ.

Nailed to the cross – ‘I have been crucified with Christ’ Gal 2v20. At first sight, this may seem to make no sense at all, after all, you weren’t even born in AD30, but just as Levi paid tithes to Melchizedek by virtue of being ‘in Abraham’ so it is true to say ‘I was crucified with Christ’ because God has placed us ‘in Christ’.

Through or ‘of God you are in Christ Jesus’ 1 Cor 1v30

Died

‘As many as were baptised into Christ Jesus were baptised into His death…our old man was crucified with Him…we died with Christ’ Rom 6v3,6,8

‘It is not I who live, but Christ…’ Gal 2v20

‘You died, you life is hidden in Christ’ Col 3v3

The New Testament cannot be clearer. Our death has been accomplished in Christ, past tense. When he died, I died.

Buried

‘We were buried with Him through baptism…’ Rom 6v4, Col 2v12

Raised

‘God…raised us up together with Christ’ Eph 2v6

The New Testament speaks about conversion to Christ as a shift - a deliverance - from ‘in Adam’ to ‘in Christ’.

In Adam, we ate from the wrong tree, with all the consequences that followed – estrangement from God, each other, and the environment…a disintegration.

In Christ, we inherit everything Christ has done and therefore we were included in the events leading up to the crucifixion, the crucifixion itself, the burial, and the resurrection, and are now recipients of Christ’s life.

We can do nothing to achieve this. Christ has done for us what we could not do for ourselves. The in-Adam-you was arrested, crucified, and buried only to be raised as a new creation, as an ‘in-Christ-you’ - Christ living out His life through you and as you.

The Telescope?

From an adult’s perspective, there IS a correct way to hold the telescope, and this is where this metaphor breaks down! Both ends are vital.

A warning. Once you ‘see’ both perspectives everything changes.

A well-used illustration of Paul’s argument in Romans is of a criminal in the dock facing the Judge, awaiting the verdict. There is no doubt that the criminal is guilty, let’s say of theft. The penalty is a fine that he cannot pay. All seems hopeless until the judge tells the criminal he is free to go; someone paid the fine. There is nothing the thief can do to pay the fine, it’s already paid, nor is he required to pay the fine.

Wonderful though that is, it acquits the criminal but doesn’t change his nature.

With substitutionary atonement, our sins are forgiven, the slate wiped clean, but the sinner remains. You will hear the following types of sentences fall from the lips of those who cling to substitutionary atonement: ‘I am covered over with the robes of righteousness’, or, ‘when God looks at me, He doesn’t see me, He sees Jesus’ or ‘I am a sinner saved by grace’.

Lurking in these phrases is fear: ‘If God were truly to see me hiding under the robes…’ but the gospel is far better.

Substitutionary and inclusive atonement together enables us to see that God has not only dealt with our ‘sins’ He has dealt with us as ‘sinners’, crucifying us on the cross with Christ. We are no longer in Adam we are in Christ. We are no longer deriving our life from the satanic hold of slavery to sin in Adam but starting out on a new path, a new life, drawing on the life of Christ Himself, incorporated as we are ‘in Christ’, learning to walk like Jesus did, not in His own abilities or strength, but from the Father’s:

‘The Son can do nothing of myself but what He sees the Father do, the Son does in like manner…I can do nothing of myself’ John 5 v 19, 30

‘I am the vine, and you are the branches, He who abides in Me and I in him, bears much fruit, without Me you can do nothing’ John 15v5

The Illusion of Control

https://morethanwriters.blogspot.com/2025/01/the-illusion-of-control.html

This article is my monthly post for the More Than Writers blog which is the blog for the Association of Christian Writers (ACW)

The Illusion of Control?

I do like a good optical illusion. The brain can’t always compute. Perhaps we should rethink the illusion: our brain’s penchant for creating 3D images from 2D drawings, is surely the most impressive illusion?

It appears that the somewhat combative relationship between imagination and illusion also holds true with writing.

I’m sure it must be the case – except for ardent atheists – that even the word ‘author’ is a troublesome term. So many novelists, poets, lyricists, and playwrights are only too willing to acknowledge that their ideas seem to arrive from without rather than from within.

Our imaginations seem to be in a perpetual partnership with an external source. Whilst I still struggle with the ridiculousness that God the Holy Spirit, let alone anyone else, might pay the slightest attention to my writing…when I come to think about it, that is exactly what I believe. It has become my new normal.

Moses had his burning bush. My most recent encounter with an ‘out of the blue inspiration’ was as thrilling as it was pitiful in comparison - an alliterative phrase ‘Dull, dreary, December’ which evolved into a humorous poem with a dash of hope.

But here’s the essence of my question: has anyone else encountered the same ‘heavenly editor’ interrupting your best-laid authorial plans? A few weeks ago I settled down to write the sequel to a historical novel (which will be (!) flying off the shelves later in 2025). The plot was clear, and I had my well-developed characters and protagonist from Book 1, so, I knew what I was doing, I just needed the discipline to get it written.

Two weeks in, a terrible thought snuck into my consciousness, ‘No, John. You are writing Book 3, not Book 2. Book 2 should take you West, not East.’ I ignored this irritating thought and tried to shoehorn its ideas into ‘my’ Book 2…but, like all authors when faced with an implacable editor, I eventually acquiesced and went West.

I conclude, therefore, that I am not in control. A little like using a Sat Nav. I still have the steering wheel, the brakes, the heater, and the sound system…but the navigation system I have grown not only to trust but enjoy. It takes me along unplanned routes.

Remembering Autumn

It’s easy to look on
Ice covered windscreens
And frost-laden rooves
And dream of direct hits
Heat from the summer sun

And forget Autumn
That prelude
Before gloves, hats, and
Black tights favoured
By cold-averse runners
Are standard wear

Tilted forwards, our minds
Require a jolt to plunge
Into the past to
Be reabsorbed by
Whatever was witnessed there

Morning: minus 3
To rid the car of grime
Winter filth in my sights
Steaming soapy water
And I advanced:
Harbingers of Spring

Instead, I stumbled upon
Autumn
Sycamore seeds lodged
In every crevice, sleeper
Spies in a foreign land

The past, lest we forget,
Has a potency…
…I reached in and slung
Each tawny spy
Away with the grime:
Forbidden fruit

What should we do? Tomorrow – Sunday 29th December 2024

The trouble and the joy of living in England is that the particular tensions that lie bubbling beneath the surface like some almost extinct volcano, provide a constant supply of material for us to moan away to our heart’s content.

Like the miserable Steptoe and his ever frustrated more ambitious son ‘Arold, in Steptoe and Son, we are never quite as happy as when we’re disgruntled. Or the impossible relationship between Basil Fawlty and Sybil, and Manuel; we thrive on dysfunction.

Into such a society riven with division came Jesus.

The issues of rich v poor, toffs v working class, private v state schools, and more distantly, church v chapel, are still as present as they ever were…just scratch a little and they come roaring back.

One of the reactions to all these divisions is to try and ignore them, disengage, pour disdain ‘on the lot of ‘em’, and blame the government for everything from the state of the roads to the length of a Mars Bar. Just so long as we don’t take too close a look under the bonnet, at home, or at ourselves.

Into such a society riven with division came Jesus.

You could join various groups in Jesus’ day:

• the very popular Pharisees were offering a recovery of a very ordered society full of Mosaic law and associated traditions and the promise of resurrection and heaven for the righteous

• or you might be drawn to the highbrow Sadducees who were more concerned with social justice here and now rather than life after the grave

• or you could head for the hills and join the Zealots: ‘terrorists’ to the Romans and ‘freedom fighters’ for Jews who wished to overthrow the Roman oppressors and create an independent state of Israel

• or try the Essenes, looking for a spiritual kingdom of God to arrive

On top of these groups were the hierarchical leaders of the Sanhedrin, Chief Priests, scribes, the Herodian Kings, and the Roman occupiers; Pontius Pilate being the governor.

Or you might opt to stay out of trouble in the North and catch fish.

But Jesus’s message couldn’t have been simpler: ‘Repent and believe, the kingdom of God is at hand’.

We do need to unpack this a little as the words carry all kinds of baggage twenty-odd centuries later. ‘Repent’ means change your mind and your thinking, it’s a complete 180-degree change to face in a different direction - the kingdom of God isn’t confined to the future or the past it is ‘at hand’ – i.e. within reach, it’s now.

Jesus’s message couldn’t have been simpler: ‘Repent and believe, the kingdom of God is at hand’

Jesus went on and demonstrated the reality of the kingdom in his own life, the way he lived and taught and his relationship with God, calling Him, Abba, Father. Actually, Abba is a closer term, almost Daddy. It’s certainly a term of deep respect and affection, of endearment. And from that relationship with his heavenly Father and the Holy Spirit, he taught memorable parables and performed miracles. He also warned the Pharisees that they were ‘blind leaders of the blind and they will end up in the ditch’.

He trained disciples who had repented and believed that the kingdom had arrived in the person of Jesus, and they too were transformed and began to live out the same life, performing miracles, and caring for the least.

After the crucifixion, resurrection, and the baptism of the Spirit at Pentecost, Peter stood up to preach the first sermon of the church. What would he say?

Pretty much what Jesus preached.

This should not surprise us and yet it does…particularly if our church experience has as much in common with Jesus’ message of the ‘kingdom of God now’ as the Pharisees had in common with Jesus, steeped as they were in rules, laws, and tradition.

Peter brought his sermon to a conclusion with a few words in answer to a question ‘What shall we do?’

‘Then Peter said to them, Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ (Christ means Messiah, it’s not a surname), for the forgiveness of sins, and you shall receive the Holy Spirit, the promise is to you and your children, all however far away, as many as the Lord our God will call’ Acts 2 v 37-39

This is what we should be preaching now: the three keys needed to enter the kingdom of God, now:

1. Repent

2. Be baptised and be forgiven for your sins

3. Receive the gift of the Holy Spirit

The disciples had to leave their nets to follow Christ. If Jesus is calling you, you will know what you have to ‘leave’ in order to ‘repent and believe’ and follow.

Because I grew up in England and had been baptised/christened as a baby, I had a choice after repenting and believing later in life. My choice was to be baptised as a believer, to express my newly found faith, rather than rely on my infant baptism. Others choose differently. Let the Holy Spirit lead you.

From that moment on the Holy Spirit will lead you, teach you, prompt you, guide you, be like a river within you, correct you and convict you if and when you get lost, and call you into whatever the King wants you to do and be to others. He will also join you to others, and minister to you through them, some of whom will be apostles, or prophets, or pastors, or teachers, or evangelists, and administrators.

It won’t always be easy. Look how they treated Jesus; we shouldn’t expect to be treated any differently, so expect opposition, social exclusion, and different forms of persecution. But remember one thing: you’ve been given a gift. You didn’t earn it through trying to live a godly life. The godly life, the life of God, the eternal life, has been given to you as a gift. As Paul wrote in his letter to the Romans, ‘nothing can separate you from the love of God in Christ Jesus’.

That’s enough to get started.

Unwanted Stone

It’s hard - moving house
That dialogue with yourself
To discard, to abandon to the past

The marks you made
The log burner, the
Handles on kitchen doors

Grey paint imperfectly slapped
Or forgotten shoes gathering dust
Under the bed

But leave behind you must
If, where you are going
Is smaller, narrower, more focussed

Puts a sculptor’s chisel
Into your hand, moving
A necessary circumcision of

Unwanted stone
Unveiling what perhaps
Was there all along

Book Review: Light Force, Brother Andrew and Al Janssen, Hodder & Stoughton (2008)

‘Who do you know in Hamas?’ Abdul asked.
’I have met with Sheikh Yassin [the founder and spiritual leader of Hamas]’
‘What do you wish to discuss?’ His pirecing gaze was unrelenting.
‘I represent Christians in Holland and the West…I would like to know his thoughts about the Palestinian situation.’

That remarkable conversation between Brother Andrew and the leader of Hamas took place in Gaza in 2001 in the aftermath of the second intifada (Arabic for uprising); the first lasting from 1987-1993.

If I have one critical comment about Light Force it is this: the title. It feels sterile and impersonal whereas the book is all about personalities – the love of God and the person of Jesus Christ. But let’s move on – this is not a book to judge either by its cover or its title. It is a must-read.

Light Force has been a compelling book for (bedtime) reading in the run-up to Christmas. Many of its diary-like pages are devoted to further meetings with Palestinian Christians in Bethlehem and elsewhere in Gaza and the West Bank. It has been a gripping read, particularly so in the current terrible conflict between Israel and Hamas and Hezbollah as a consequence of the attack by Hamas on unarmed civilians at the Supernova music festival and kibbutzim including Be’eri Kibbutz on October 7th 2023.

Brother Andrew is well-known to many Christians for his other book God’s Smuggler which describes his conversion to Christ, and the miraculous healing of his crippled leg, and the subsequent story of how as a young man he dedicated himself to illegally transporting Bibles and Christian literature behind the Iron Curtain (often in a VW Beetle) to persecuted Christians living under atheistic communistic dictatorships in Russia, Eastern Europe, and China during the 1950s and 1960s.

Tension in the book is almost tangible as he finds extraordinary ways to meet with leaders from Hamas and Hezbollah

After the publication of God’s Smuggler, it was too dangerous to continue his travels to the Communist block but by then he had formed an organisation, Open Doors, to carry on the work. His focus then shifted to the Middle East and the conflict between Palestinians and Israel – and the Christian church existing on either side of the national divide.

Tension in the book is almost tangible as he finds extraordinary ways to meet with leaders from Hamas and Hezbollah – terrorist organisations dedicated to the destruction of Israel and the ‘liberation’, as they see it, of Palestine from Israeli occupation. The impressive core of the book, however, lies with his adventures with Jewish and Palestinian Christian believers and the influence he, and Open Doors, has had in strengthening the church in Israel and in Gaza and the West Bank, bringing Arab and Jewish believers together.

Readers of a certain age will remember Yassar Arafat, the leader of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO). Light Force records how Brother Andrew met with him, gave him a Bible, and asked for and secured permission and funding to open a Christian Bookshop in Gaza.

This book vividly explores the extraordinary faith and courage of Brother Andrew – but also of many others inevitably caught up in the conflict. It will take the reader inside the News, away from the headlines to a very different story.

A story well told - and one that deserves to be re-told.

Despite being written in 2008, it is as relevant in 2024 as it was when first published.

The Wedding at Cana – what was that all about?

When Jesus turned the water into wine, John, in recalling the event, left us with 12 memorable well-known New Testament verses:

On the third day a wedding took place at Cana in Galilee.

Jesus’ mother was there, and Jesus and his disciples had also been invited to the wedding. When the wine was gone, Jesus’ mother said to him, “They have no more wine.” “Woman, why do you involve me?” Jesus replied. “My hour has not yet come.” His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.” Nearby stood six stone water jars, the kind used by the Jews for ceremonial washing, each holding from twenty to thirty gallons. Jesus said to the servants, “Fill the jars with water”; so they filled them to the brim. Then he told them, “Now draw some out and take it to the master of the banquet.”

They did so, and the master of the banquet tasted the water that had been turned into wine. He did not realize where it had come from, though the servants who had drawn the water knew. Then he called the bridegroom aside and said, “Everyone brings out the choice wine first and then the cheaper wine after the guests have had too much to drink; but you have saved the best till now.”

What Jesus did here in Cana of Galilee was the first of the signs through which he revealed his glory; and his disciples believed in him.

I’d like to examine the events within the wedding from a normal social perspective - albeit interrupted by a miracle. But the problem is that John doesn’t leave it there. He states the reason he included this miracle in his gospel as it was ‘the first of the signs’ v 11

From a social point of view, we see a normal everyday event – a wedding. This must have been some months into Jesus’ ministry as John recalls that the disciples were invited along with Jesus and his mother Mary. We’re told there were servants present and a ‘Master of the feast’ and therefore a feast. The families involved had not stinted.

Someone had miscalculated the amount of wine needed and it had run out. News of this had filtered through to Mary. I’m assuming the news was kept from embarrassing the wedding families, bride and groom. Panic was setting in away from the top table and time was pressing. Jesus steps in and performs the miracle. I do have a question: where did the servants go to fill the six stone waterpots each of whom contained 20 or 30 gallons? That’s heavy. There must have been a stream, or a pool, or a cistern associated with the venue. And it must have taken some time. Nevertheless, the miracle performed saved the day.

‘Jesus, bring new wine out of me’ if that’s your prayer, He will

But what did John mean by ‘the first of signs?’

Here’s the outline of my answer – it was a sign pointing to:

• Jesus as ‘the new wine’ kept by the Master until the end

• Israel, at last, fulfilling her prophetic calling

• Anyone who believes

Jesus

The Master of the Feast says (with astonishment) to the bridegroom ‘You have kept the best wine until last!’. I can only imagine the look of incredulity on the face of the bridegroom. He had no idea there had been a crisis and now was supping a superb red as the wedding party was winding down. Both of them left nonplussed.

But the parable is clear enough. (NB I’m not suggesting John portrayed a parable as a real event, only that real events can be seen as a ‘sign’ or a parable of something more than the event) The Master is The Lord, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob who had sent Moses, David, Solomon, Isaiah, Jeremiah…but the wine of the prophets had run out. Israel had not had a prophet for approximately 400 years until John the Baptist. But the true Master of the Feast was saving the best wine ‘til last. Jesus.

What Jesus did here in Cana of Galilee was the first of the signs through which he revealed his glory; and his disciples believed in him.

I don’t think it is unreasonable to say that Jesus left the wedding with more disciples than when he arrived.

Israel

This is the first sign foretelling that Israel would, at last, fulfil her calling to be a ‘light to the Gentiles’.

In the Old Testament, Israel as a nation is symbolically referred to as a grape-bearing vine, or a vineyard. To make good wine, the grapes have to be in good condition, taken, trampled, and allowed to ferment, then enjoyed as wine.

Often the prophets had to warn Israel that the vineyard was not producing good fruit. But now, Jesus had arrived. Later in John’s gospel, John writes that Jesus said ‘I am the true vine, My father is the vinedresser’ John 15v1

Jesus was crushed and trampled. Arrested at night. Flogged. Mocked. Had a crown of thorns to wear. Falsely accused. Taken and crucified. It seemed as if all was lost. Just another good man crushed by those he had the temerity to criticise. But three days later: New Wine.

All those who first believed in Jesus as the Messiah and King of Israel and now risen from the dead – were Jews. All the apostles were Jews. Mary, Martha, Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Nicodemus – all Jews. A new ‘Israel-in Christ’ had been revealed and within a generation, the good news ‘the gospel’ had spread all around the Mediterranean, even in Rome. Light to the Gentiles fulfilled, new wine was being tasted by Jews and by Gentiles.

Anyone who believes

There’s a beautiful song called New Wine

In the crushing; In the pressing
You are making new wine
In the soil; I now surrender
You are breaking new ground
So I yield to You into Your careful hand

When I trust You I don't need to understand
Make me Your vessel; Make me an offering
Make me whatever You want me to be
I came here with nothing; But all You have given me
Jesus bring new wine out of me

This account of the wedding in Cana is not restricted to Jesus as the Messiah, or the ‘Israel-in-Christ generation’ of the first century AD but to all generations.

The first of signs is this: this miracle of turning cold water into new wine is a prophetic picture of the promise in Scripture to all. If Jesus is calling you, you will know. There will be an unbearable quest in your heart and mind. For the first disciples, they came to a point when Jesus simply said ‘Follow Me’. They were ready. The New Testament records what happened:

‘Immediately they left their nets and followed Him’ Mark 1v 18

They left their successful fishing business. They left home. They left their previous thinking about just about everything. You will know what you have to leave. But the promise of the events at the wedding of Cana is not just for AD30, it is right up to date: ‘Jesus, bring new wine out of me’ if that’s your prayer, He will.

The first of signs for you and for me. For all.

And it is the story of so many who turn to Christ – not religious observance, not prayer, not church attendance, not bible scholarship, or doing good. The story that follows faith in Christ is one of unexpected changes. You may well want to meet fellow believers in a church, have a real hunger for reading the bible, or find yourself praying, singing worship songs like New Wine even, or prompted to give time to someone, or money…but these are the outcome of genuine faith in Christ not the demands of a religion. You may even see God working in other people’s lives as you pray for them such as miracles of healing or provision or forgiveness as Christ ministers to others through you.

And there will be crushing. Suffering. Opposition. Your own struggles. But just like the early disciples you will see His suffering in you and His glory in you.

The song contains another verse:

‘Cause where there is new wine
There is new power
There is new freedom
And the Kingdom is here
I lay down my old flames
To carry Your new fire today

The first of signs.

Standing on tiptoe

One day the Sun resolved
To pay a long-delayed visit
To the Moon
That grey, crusty, cold,
One-faced world

The Moon sensing
All was not as it had been
Slung its hook and dived
Under the Earth
In eclipsical shade

The Sun, knowing
In his innards that fear was at play,
Beamed, unconcerned,
Traversed the emptiness
Of Space and drew near

The Moon, half-afraid, half-intrigued,
Popped a crescent foot out,
Beyond the shadow,
And felt the warmth sink
Crater-bound, in, and in further

The Earth, meantime,
Alarmed at the thought of
Irreversible ocean evaporation
Made plans, and hid
Concealed beneath the clouds

Had Space not been so vacuous
The Moon and Earth would have
Heard the Sun crackle and pop
With laughing joy, chewing
On a delicious secret or two

Just when all was up
And elements should surely melt
An intriguing unprediction
Took place and, like climbing under
A heavy tog duvet on a cold night,

The Sun wrapped himself
In the Earth, like an old
Familiar t-shirt
And sat back feeling
Quite at home

The Sun, now clothed in the Earth
Bathed the Moon
In multicoloured lights
And the world became
An Inside-out wonder

The whole of creation
Standing on tiptoe had
Waited a long time for
The sons of God
To be revealed

Poem in honour of J B Philips, 20th Century Anglican bible translator

Acts Chapter 6 Rethought in terms of English Law v the Law of Moses

Scene: Jerusalem AD 30-40

A few years after Jesus’ crucifixion, resurrection, ascension, and the powerful baptism of the Spirit on the Day of Pentecost, the church is growing rapidly as Jews turn to Christ in their thousands:

Acts 2v41 ‘And about three thousand were added to them that day’

That was following Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost. It’s worth noting that many of the three thousand would only have been in Jerusalem for the Feast of Pentecost and, therefore, would have returned to their villages scattered throughout Israel, and further afield, once the week had ended.

However, the church continued to grow amongst permanent residents of Jerusalem:

Acts 4v4 ‘Many of those who heard the word believed; and the number of men came to be about five thousand’

The growth of the church in Jerusalem was set against continued opposition from the Temple Authorities, the council called the Sanhedrin, made up of chief priests, scribes, rulers, and elders, split as they were between two factions the Pharisees and the Sadducees.

In these early months and maybe years all the believers were Jews, placing their faith not only in the reliability of the eye-witness accounts of the resurrection but believing along with the apostles that Jesus had not only been raised from the dead but was Messiah, the Christ, and as such the King of Israel, the son of David. It was a Jewish affair!

Under great opposition from the authorities, the church looked after its own members:

‘All who believed were together and had all things in common and sold their possessions, dividing them amongst all as anyone had need’ Acts 2v44,45

Acts 6

Acts 6, therefore, is often read entirely as events taking place within the church, not in the wider religio-civic society in Jerusalem, however, the case for rethinking this is surprisingly strong.

‘In those days when the number of disciples was increasing, the Hellenistic Jews among them complained against the Hebraic Jews because their widows were being overlooked in the daily distribution of food’ v1

The ‘daily distribution’ is traditionally understood to refer to a system of distribution within the church, amongst believers. There is ample evidence from previous verses to support this contention:

‘No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had…there were no needy persons…those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.’ 4v32-37 NIV

The apostles oversaw the distribution to those in need. Acts 6v1 seems to suggest that, by this time, a daily distribution system was in place and that within the church, the Hellenistic Jewish believers were complaining that the distribution favoured believing widows who were Hebraic Jews.

This view, that the distribution was an internal matter for the church, is emphasised in the NIV translation above by the inclusion of ‘among them’ in 6v1. These words, however, do not appear in the Greek. Compare this with the NASB and NKJV:

‘Now at this time, as the disciples were increasing in number, a complaint developed on the part of the Hellenistic Jews against the native Hebrews, because their widows were being overlooked in the daily serving of food.’ NASB

‘Now in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplying, there arose a complaint against the Hebrews by the Hellenists, because their widows were neglected in the daily distribution.’ NKJV

An alternative reading of this verse potentially offers a better fit to the complex and fluid society that Jerusalem had become, now that it was split between those believing Jesus as the Messiah and those who did not; also split between Pharisees and Sadducees; the Royal family of the Herods and the Zealots, Jews who were vying for a violent insurrection; and the Essenes who were looking for the Kingdom of God to appear but whose communities were semi-detached from mainstream Jewish Society.

Governing daily life in Jerusalem, whatever faction one might have preferred, was the Law of Moses – referred to as the Law.

One way of understanding the role of the Law at the time is to consider the place of Shariah Law within British society. The current position is that within Muslim communities, Shariah Law is rulings cannot breach UK Law. UK Law holds the supremacy. For example, it would be deemed t be a criminal act to cut off the hands of thieves – which might be permissible under Shariah Law – as it contravenes British statute. This was similar to the position of Jewish society and how it intersected with Roman jurisdiction.

Jews continued to live and function under the Law of Moses, but Roman Law was supreme. The Jewish Sanhedrin could only request that Jesus be crucified but the order for Jesus to be taken and crucified had to be taken by Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor.

Under the Law it was the duty of local authorities to distribute food to widows:

‘At the end of the third year you shall bring out the tithe of your produce that year and store it up within your gates and the Levite…and the stranger and the fatherless and the widow who are within your gates may come and eat and be satisfied, that the Lord may bless you’ Deut 4 v 28,29

Within the gates of Jerusalem, therefore it would have been the Sanhedrin that oversaw the distribution of food to the widows whether Hellenistic or Hebraic. It was a priestly function.

The resident population of Jerusalem at the time is estimated to have been approximately 40,000 ( Estimating the Population of Ancient Jerusalem - The BAS Library ).

It is difficult to gauge the number of widows, however, in the UK, widows account for approximately 6% of the population. And of those, approximately two-thirds are women. It may not be valid to use these statistics for Jerusalem in AD30 – AD40 but this would give approximately 2000 to 3000 widows in Jerusalem dependent on relief under the Law of Moses.

The cry from the Hellenistic Greek-speaking Jewish widows against their Hebraic Aramaic-speaking Jewish widows, therefore, may well have been directed at the Sanhedrin and the delegated local councils, rather than the apostles.

If so, it was into this difficult dispute that the church appointed seven deacons who were ‘full of faith and the Holy Spirit and of good reputation’ 6v3 to ensure a fair distribution.

Quite how that ministry intersected and overlapped with the local authorities and the priestly function in Jerusalem to distribute food to widows is unclear; the text is silent. But whether in cooperation with the authorities or entirely within the church:

Under the Law it was the duty of local authorities to distribute food to widows

The Law of Moses was upheld and fulfilled within the church!

This is exactly what Jeremiah and Ezekiel had prophesied would be the fruit of the coming New Covenant:

‘The days are coming when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and Judah…I will put My law in their minds and write it on their hearts…’ Jer 31v 31-34; Hebrews 8 v7f,

‘I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you, I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes and you will keep My judgements and keep them’ Ez 36 v 26-27

‘I will give them an undivided heart and put a new spirit in them; I will remove from them their heart of stone and give them a heart of flesh. Then they will follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws.’ Ez 11 v 19,20

Jesus had criticised the Temple authorities for corruption, greed, oppression of the poor, and hypocrisy. Despite having the Law they failed to obey its demands despite hundreds of added rules and regulations. A typical critique by Jesus was:

‘Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! You cleanse the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of extortion and self-indulgence’ Mt 23 v 25

This being the case, it is not difficult to see how such an injustice may have occurred in Jerusalem, favouring ‘superior’ Aramaic-speaking Jewish widows over ‘inferior’ Greek-speaking Jewish widows.

There was no such favouritism amongst the apostles and so they put this right.

As did Paul when instructing Timothy left in charge of overseeing the church in Ephesus. The Law of Moses had no place or authority in Ephesus, a gentile city. Roman rule prevailed. The Law was virtually unknown except amongst Jews who met in the local synagogue.

Whatever the local regulations to may have been to provide relief to widows, Paul instructed Timothy to ‘honour true widows’ 1 Tim 5 v 3 which involved some administration. A list of those who qualified as widows was made, and the church made responsible for their relief.

Again we see the Law of Moses being fulfilled through the body of Christ as prophesied by Ezekiel and Jeremiah. Paul wrote that believers are ‘not under the Law but under grace’; God freely gives us a new heart, a new spirit, and the Holy Spirit who writes the law on our hearts so that we find ourselves fulfilling the law not reluctantly but from the heart.

Under this New Covenant, the Jewish church can finally fulfil the calling on Israel to be ‘a light to the gentiles’ Is 49v6. Within a few years Peter is preaching the gospel to the Gentiles and Paul is planting churches from ‘Jerusalem to Illyricum’ (Serbia) in Gentile-dominated regions. Churches, communities of Christians, are forming that – imperfectly of course – are fulfilling the Law of Moses as the Holy Spirit touches their hearts.

England 2024?

Ever since the earliest churches formed in the 4th and 5th centuries in England, the law of the land has been greatly influenced by the Law of Moses. The dietary and temple laws were not applicable in the New Testament era, but the moral landscape in England has been shaped through passing laws in parliament generally in keeping with the Law of Moses.

Our nation may consider itself to be post-Christian, and even indulge in passing laws that oppose the Law of Moses, but we cannot deny the historic influence of the Scriptures, the Old and New Testaments, in forming our society over many centuries.

Atheists, like Richard Dawkins, acknowledge this; he is on record as describing himself as a ‘Cultural Christian’ realising that he has largely inherited his notions of right and wrong from this Christian heritage, which, in turn, is based on the statutes contained in the Law of Moses.

Jesus quoted Deuteronomy 10 v 12: ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul’, an strength,’ and quoted Leviticus 19 v18: ‘Love your neighbour as yourself’.

Conclusion

Our sense of justice, equity, and morality and our current laws concerning the treatment of refugees, foreigners, widows, children, commerce, war, marriage and sexuality, property, ownership, and inheritance, if not directly then indirectly have been influenced by the Law of Moses and taken to new levels of the conscience through Christ’s Sermon on the Mount.

‘You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbour and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you’

Mt 5 v 43/44

Isaiah saw this day coming…and saw our day coming.

My Elect One in whom My soul delights!
I have put My Spirit upon Him;
He will bring forth justice to the Gentiles…
…He will not fail nor be discouraged,
Till He has established justice in the earth;
And the coastlands shall wait for His law…
…I will keep You and give You as a covenant to the people,
As a light to the Gentiles’ s Is 42 v 1-6

It is not unreasonable to equate ourselves in the British Isles as ‘the coastlands’ nor is it unreasonable to say that the calling of Israel to be a ‘light to the Gentiles’ has been fulfilled through the early church, through the apostles, taking the gospel to the Gentiles.

And part of that ‘light’ is contained in the Law of Moses.

For the Christian, the Holy Spirit is at work in our hearts writing the Law on our hearts. We are not required to obey an external law, carved into stone. We will continue to ‘walk in the Spirit’ trusting that He will fulfil the law that He is writing on our hearts, even through such imperfect vessels as ourselves.

For those amongst us who are not believers but have a legitimate say in the direction of the nation, we would say there is much wisdom and light in the Law of Moses. Our challenge would be to read it and reflect on it, discover its wisdom, and pass laws in keeping with its light.

Left Brain v Right Brain…for writers

Left brain v. Right brain in Writers

Original Post - click the link above to www.morethanwriters.blogspot.com

It’s difficult to avoid magazine articles, blogs, books, even, that present the world and individuals as either Left-brain or Right-brain dominant.

It all sounds so neat and tidy, as if the brain research has uncovered a key component of human personality left undiscovered for…yonks. Pictures of neurones firing away when presented with images of spreadsheets (left brain) or Monty Python (right brain) are compelling.

Thing is, we like (i) neat and tidy (ii) and eccentricity.

Or am I just talking to Brits?

Here’s a spoof conversation between two writers:

‘Tell me, Jarvis, how do you plan your novels?’

‘I’m so glad you’ve asked me Martine. Not because I know the answer, but the intonation of your soft Dublin accent has given me an idea of a character I’ve been wrestling with…’

‘I didn’t expect that! I’ve known you a long time, Jarvis, but I’ve never quite understood how you prioritise character and plot. You know, I was speaking to our mutual friend, Isaac, last week. He imagines five characters playing poker…’

‘Ah yes, Isaac and poker. He does all the maths. Brilliant at Bridge. Impressive. For me, writing is more like abstract painting. Something moves me towards a colour, and that…’

‘Something moves you?’

‘Doesn’t it you? I mean, an idea, or a feeling of dread, or ecstasy, a longing…’

‘What, about the plot or the person?’

‘Yes, exactly!!’

‘Which…the plot or the character?’

‘Pardon?’

According to the left/right brain characterisation, the left-brain dominant are efficient planners, well-organised, good delegators, and regularly water their indoor plants, whereas right-brainers veer towards spontaneity, insight, empathy, and wear odd-socks.

And, if you’re (rightly, I feel) a tad resistant to being labelled, characterised too tightly, hemmed in by dubious conclusions from brain research, or simply ‘a bit of a mixture’ then, I greet you, and say ‘welcome to the muddle in the middle’.

My right brain seems to write poetry, and my left brain is currently too strong when writing novels…I have to work hard at developing character over plot.

I’m a Chemistry tutor, passable at Maths, partial to a spreadsheet, and drool over maps, but I seem to be engaged in a process (Holy Spirit inspired?) of picking the lock to my left-brain conditioning. Some would say our whole society, education, legal, and political system reeks of Enlightenment thinking, exalting the rational mind over the wind of the spirit, is Greek-rooted. And that right-brainers have a hard time feeling at home in their own skin let alone in the company of others. In schools, we place greater importance on Maths, Science, and English (grammar) than Music, Art, and Drama and wonder why many young people feel alienated.

You’ll find right-brainers on the poetry circuit, or prophesying in church, lampooning the self-important, relieved to stumble across Charlie Mackesy, or supporting Harlequins.

For those of a certain age, I leave you with a question: are you a Captain Mainwaring or a Sergeant Wilson?

Or maybe Phoebe v Monica in Friends is a less patriarchal comparison?

The Big Thank You

For the prison break – I thank you
For kissing goodbye to the wrong tree
Now tree-of-life hugging – thank you
For slave redemption, I kneel and sing
Free at last

For the courtroom drama – thank you
For my advocate – I thank you
And no solicitor’s fees – I stagger
Overwhelmed, convulsed with laughter
Free at last

For the invitation to the king’s table – I thank you
And again when I forgot holiness
Those new clothes, smelling fresh
How can I thank you?
Loved at last

For everyday’s content:
A dew laden spider’s web
A breaking wave crashing
On a long sandy beach
You did that?

For ungainly giraffes
Clashing necks
Or endless ants endlessly
Working for the common good
For the endless variety – I thank you

For Harry Redknapp, yes, really
And Olga Korbutt, Pink Floyd
Solzhenitsyn, all apostles
Beyond the frontier
Thank you

And for Mrs Late for Lunch
The Major with a glass eye
For friends, family,
Funny people, fiery people, people
Yes, thank you

God, for naming me – I thank you
For calling me – I thank you
For Your wind-blown Spirit
Carrying me like a seed
Purpose at last

But when all is said and done
When you kneel and wash my feet
I am undone by
Your greeting in heaven
Home at last. Thank you.

The Naming

Atlantic blasts unleashed
You unstuck my feet
Stood on a rock, but
It was no defence

I could have knelt, I suppose
But I did not, instead
Chin in the air, eyes closed
I shouted for you to come

Pitched over, drummed down,
I joined the snakes on the ground
Returned like a small child
To the lower places

But it was here in the dust
I heard of another storm
Brewing, boiling, roaring
I looked the other way

Who are you, wind-wild
And coming from the east?
Full of terrible kindness
Pulling up the fallen

I could name you,
Except you said ‘No, I am
Here to name you’
It’s time

Suspended between the present and the future

My monthly blog post for https://morethanwriters.blogspot.com/ https://morethanwriters.blogspot.com/2024/11/suspended-somewhere-between-present-and.html

Suspended…

Sat here in my favourite coffee shop, there’s a buzz of conversation. Mums with babies, blokes like me, silent monks buried in contemplation, half-consumed cake, laptops, music, wobbly tables, and proper floorboards.

It has a writing vibe. Not a meeting point for avant-garde artists and poets but a – I don’t know – a welcoming hum. A place of anonymity amongst crowds. And the music isn’t intrusive but loud enough to tap along to.

Why am I here? The estate agent is showing another potential buyer around the house, so I’ve relocated here, wondering if my blog-writing-tryst will be interrupted by a promising phone-call.

Whilst my body lives in the present, my mind is less confined by the clock. I confess, I have already built an extension, or a writing shed, or a garage, or all three at the new house. The only drawback is that the future is dependent on the present; got to sell first. Time is frustratingly linear!

It’s the same disconnect with my writing – it’s suspended somewhere between the present and the future. The present seems to be as well-defined as a warmed-up slab of chewing gum, stretching far into an uncertain future. The book is written, but awaiting editing, a cover, blurb, publishing, book launch, and marketing…and its sequel seems to be lurking just over the horizon.

What to do?

Note to self: a few things come to mind:

• Ask ‘What is your core purpose as a (Christian) writer?’ If that’s too heavy a question over coffee and cake then maybe a 9 pm vigil in the back garden, cigar and whisky to hand, will help?

• Remind oneself that the Holy Spirit is at work sharing His patience…or, more accurately, forming His patience in me

• Keep exercising the writing muscles – poetry, blogs, short stories

• Read books, but try not to analyse the text so heavily that enjoying the story is lost…but note mastery of technique in passing e.g. Ian Rankin’s skill at planting incidental small actions within the dialogue

OK. The remaining froth in my flat white requires a spoon which is downstairs. Next time. And my cheesecake is no more, and there’s been no phone call from the estate agent.

The future is pressing its claim. It’s almost time to exit.

The future is pressing its claim. It’s almost time to exit. But I’m sitting here caught up in the thought that this rather impromptu post might encourage someone who’s floundering in an ‘in-between’ state between the present writing project and what lies tantalisingly just over the horizon.

If so you’re welcome to join me – in spirit – at 9pm in the back garden.

Are you a Cultural Christian?

The phrase ‘Cultural Christian’ is a fairly new kid on the block. What does it mean?

It may be surprising to learn that atheist Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion, now describes himself as a Cultural Christian.

In fact, according to Justin Brierley (author of The Surprising Rebirth of Belief in God) many of the former members of New Atheism as championed by biologist Dawkins, philosopher Daniel C. Dennet, neuroscientist Sam Harris, and journalist Christopher Hitchens, in abandoning the New Atheism movement, have reassessed their antagonism towards Christianity and its positive historical influence in forming Western societies.

Decline of New Atheism

Like Dawkins, historian Tom Holland has acknowledged that the message of Christianity has shaped our thinking, values, and ethics over many centuries ‘I began to realize that actually, in almost every way, I am Christian’.

Equally, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who had rejected her Islamic faith and embraced atheism now says:

‘Tom Holland has shown in his marvellous book Dominion, all sorts of apparently secular freedoms — of the market, of conscience and of the press — find their roots in Christianity. And so I have come to realise that Russell and my atheist friends failed to see the wood for the trees. The wood is the civilisation built on the Judeo-Christian tradition; it is the story of the West, warts and all.’

Follow the link if you would like to see a debate between Richard Dawkins and Ayaan Ali (31) Richard Dawkins vs Ayaan Hirsi Ali: The God Debate - YouTube

By describing himself as a Cultural Christian has Dawkins rejected his atheism?

No. He is not claiming to be a Christian believer. But he is willing to acknowledge that a significant influence on his values, sense of right and wrong, morals, and ethics are derived, not from scientific atheism or his independent powers of reason but inherited from the impact of being marinaded in the New Testament gospels and epistles in England and elsewhere for many centuries.

Whereas Tom Holland’s re-evaluation of Christianity has led him back to actual faith in Christ, not so with Richard Dawkins:

‘Presumably what happened to Jesus was what happens to all of us when we die. We decompose. Accounts of Jesus's resurrection and ascension are about as well-documented as Jack and the Beanstalk’

(This, of course, would have been my own position before I examined the evidence that Dawkins distances himself from, claiming it doesn’t exist).

The question that emerges from the ‘splintering’ of the new atheists and the acceptance of the label ‘Cultural Christianity’ from various commentators like Dawkins, is ‘What is the difference between a Cultural Christian and a Christian believer?

For evangelical Christians, the answer may be as straightforward as differentiating between Jupiter and Mars, Sibelius and Sinatra, or cats and dogs. In evangelical terms unless and until someone has made a conscious decision to ‘leave their nets to follow Christ’ (whatever that might look like for each individual) and profess their faith in Jesus risen from the dead, they are not ‘born again’, not ‘saved’, not part of the church, and therefore, not a Christian.

For those who have a more sacramental view, the grace of God is at work in someone’s life by participating in rituals such as infant baptism or communion/Mass, whether or not they have a ‘conversion’ experience dividing their non-Christian past from their Christian future.

Let us consider these words of Jesus:

‘He who receives you receives Me, and he who receives Me receives Him who sent Me…and whoever gives one of these little ones a glass of water… will not lose his reward’ Matt 10v40, 42

Am I blurring the lines?

I think I am, but only because of Jesus’s words in this verse and similar verses. The bible asserts that God looks on the heart. If so, only God can know what ‘receiving Christ’ looks like in each individual. And only God can truly know if a human heart is set in stone against His Son, Jesus Christ, and will not submit to His Lordship.

I have asked groups of Christians how many had a ‘conversion experience’ and can pinpoint the place and the time when they left their nets to follow Christ, and how many had more of a dimmer-switch experience and cannot pinpoint a moment of decision, but the reality of Christ dawned on them over time. The ratio has always been 50:50.

My own experience is that I can pinpoint the moment. It was as I opened my mouth to say the Creed during an otherwise unremarkable CoE Series 3 Communion service, at All Saints, Whitstable on Sunday 11th January 1976. And, because the liturgy is so precise, that must have been at approximately 10.50 in the morning!

On reflection though, can I really say that this moment divides time into two halves? The first time I can remember wanting to follow Christ was in 1964, twelve years before…aged 6…during a school assembly when the gospel story of the disciples leaving their nets to follow Christ. In my 6-year-old self, I was ready to do just that!

What is the difference between a Cultural Christian and a Christian believer?

In the intervening years, I absorbed the commonly held agnosticism of the times, but what I knew of the New Testament was still creating questions that I only found answers to many years later.

So I cannot tell you, from Christ’s perspective, when He captured me and won my heart and allegiance; maybe it was long before I capitulated consciously to Him.

Possibly the most dramatic conversion story still known as a Damascus road conversion (or Damascene conversion as some say it) – is of the Pharisee Saul - later known as St Paul. Surely this is evidence enough that life can be divided into two halves? But note carefully what Jesus said to Paul:

‘I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. It is hard for you to kick against the goads’ Acts 9v5

Despite his implacable opposition to the gospel, and believers his opposition was hurting him; he was ‘kicking against the goads’. Each campaign, each arrest, or murder was like kicking a cactus thorn. A process was going on in his deepest being, possibly unknown to Saul, certainly resisted by him. Eventually, though, it was decision time. Over the following days, blinded in his encounter with the risen Jesus on the road to Damascus, and in a terrible state staying in Damascus, and with Ananias preaching to him, Saul came to a moment of decision. This is what the New Testament records:

‘He arose and was baptised’ Acts 9v18

Later he would testify that God had called him from the womb to be an apostle. When he looked back, he saw how God had been at work in his life bringing him to the point of decision and baptism.

In conclusion, we can be certain about two things:

• We cannot see what is going on in the hearts of those around us with respect to their relationship to Christ

• Whether someone calls themselves a cultural Christian or not, at the point of decision, no one can remain on the fence…for long.

The phrase ‘Cultural Christian’ is a fairly new catchphrase that many others apart from Professor Dawkins may start to use. But it can only be a holding position. Eventually, Cultural Christians will have to make up their minds about the resurrection; and ‘leave everything to follow Him’ and confess that Jesus is Lord, or take the awesome decision to refuse Christ.