So I ask myself:

• What would it be like to be so passionate about your national identify that you were as devoted to it as much as we are our football clubs or celebrities?
• What if you loved your home city so much it was the dominant element in your identity?
• What if the values that had shaped the formation of your nation also united the nation’s people?
• What if those same values had driven the conquest of all other nations and had brought great wealth and glory to your nation?

Well, then you would have a tiny inkling of what it was like to be a Roman citizen.

For those of us in the West I think it is almost impossible to imagine what it is like to admire and even idolise your capital city and nation. We are so full of cynicism that its hard to imagine people ever being so naive. But this was the wonder and beauty of Rome – that although it had its fair share of problems, it was loved, really loved, by its people. More than a logistical head of an empire – Rome was a dream.

But then what would happen if that dream was shattered? How strong would be the emotional outpouring when it was finally crushed and the city was sacked? Well this is exactly what happened in 410AD. As the Romans were looking around for explanations for this disaster, some pointed the finger of blame at the Christians. It was in response to this criticism that Augustine wrote the City of God and in Book 1 he attacks these criticisms head on. 

Augustine helpfully summarises the focus of Book 1 at the start of Book 2 “the first duty that presented itself was to reply to those who hold the Christian religion responsible for the wars with which the whole world is tormented, and in particular the recent sack of Rome by the Barbarians.” He goes on to say that his opponents ascribe the defeat to the Christian’s prohibition of “the offering of abominable sacrifices to demons”. 

He begins his defence by looking at the remarkable restraint that the Barbarians demonstrated in sparing many of those who took refuge in the tombs of the Christian martyrs. He seeks to highlight the ungratefulness of those that were saved from death by their momentary association with the protection offered by the name of Christ, who moments later were vocal opponents of the very faith that had rescued them. This all happened while many Christians were tortured and killed. In response to these injustices, he asks the questions: “why did these divine blessings extend also to the godless and the ungrateful? And why did the hardships inflicted by the enemy fall alike on the godless and godly?”

Thus, the start of Book 1 seeks to understand the cause and effect relationship between religious worship and temporal blessings. If it is true that gods are to be worshiped for blessings in this life only and there is a causative connection between the two, then there could be some ground for complaint. However, as Augustine demonstrates, Rome’s pagan gods had been unable to prevent past defeats when they had been worshiped as the national religion. He then explains, that although there is no direct connection between the two, there is an indirect undercurrent at work. He explains that there is a purpose in suffering – both for the righteous and the wicked. For the righteous God uses suffering to purify their desires and refine their character, while for the wicked he uses it to judge their behaviour. He explains it with the analogy of fire: “the fire which makes the gold shine makes chaff smoke” (1.8).

Augustine then address some of the practical pastoral issues that such suffering produces – what about Christians who were not buried? What about Christian women who were raped? What about those who committed suicide because of the shame of their assault? These were pressing issues of his day and he seeks to answer the issues they raise. Regarding the issues of burial, he says that based on Matthew 10.28  those who cannot kill the soul can do nothing with a dead body that can threaten the resurrection.

With regard to rape, Augustine seeks to comfort those who have suffered under this terrible violation with the thought that chastity and purity is something that cannot be taken away without our consent. He uses the example from popular culture of Lucretia’s suicide to illustrate that the Romans believed it was possible to remain innocent and yet be violated in this way. However, he cannot agree with her suicide as the right response for he sees this as an unnecessary reaction to perceived immortality. He quotes a saying of the time that “there were two people involved and only one committed adultery” (1.19). Hence, he sees this as murdering an innocent person – themselves! For if the person really is innocent of immorality then what right have they to murder themselves and commit such a sin.

He then asks if suicide can ever be a noble act of self-sacrifice to avoid being defiled. Augustine argues that one sin should not be avoided by committing another – particularly if committing an actual sin to avoid a potential sin. He takes this to its logical extreme and says that if we really wanted to avoid all potential sin we should commit suicide straight after being saved. For at this point we can avoid all future sin and ensure that we have been cleansed of all sin. By using this extreme example he shows how absurd this train of thinking is. True greatness, he argues, is a “spirit that has the strength to endure a life of misery instead of running away from it” (1.22). He does add the caveat that in some exceptional circumstances (e.g. Samson’s suicide) God may directly proscribe a particular act that in normal circumstances would be disallowed.

In the final few chapters he returns to the issue that he began with and says that the real reason the anti-Christians complain is because they want to return to their indulgent and indolent past. He paints a vivid picture of pagan hedonism that was mediated through the plays and actors of ancient Rome. Actors that were, apparently, producing degraded plays at the request of these pagan gods. He concludes that a further use of temporal judgements is to curb our lusts by fear of punishment. He rebukes their inconsistency when “you refuse to be held responsible for the evil that you do, while you hold the Christian era responsible for the evil which you suffer” (1.33).

Response

This is a wide-ranging and thought-provoking first book from Augustine. I agree with his basic argument about the difficulty of attributing cause and effect between temporal events and the worship of false gods or even the true God. For it is only when God speaks into his creation (either in prophecy or interpretation) to explain the purpose of a particular event that we can be certain of his intention. It would be difficult to argue for the truthfulness of Israel’s God if military victories were the only criteria we had to go on. Many times Israel was routed before its enemies - most often because of their unfaithfulness. But to an outside observer, such as the Assyrians attacking Judah in 2 Kings 18.31-35, it seemed that Israel was like any other nation. Only the interpretation of the prophets provides the context for the various judgements on the nation.

However, I found his view of rape to be too influenced by Greek thought, who regarded the body (flesh) as evil and the spirit (soul) pure. Hence he thinks that what happens to one can be isolated from the other – the body can be defiled while mind and spirit remains pure. I struggle to share this view as I see the body inextricable connected to spirit so that what defiles one defiles the other. Finally, I didn’t share all his comments on suicide. However, it did remind me of the current debate on assisted suicide in the UK and his encouragement to take the nobler path of enduring difficulties rather than taking the drastic but immediate way out is a timely reminder of the virtue of perseverance.

Father, help me to see you are guiding the current of my life, but not need an explanation for every breaking wave. I seek you and know that you are shaping my life, through the good and hard times. Help me to be content with knowing the destination, without questionning the purpose of each trial that leads me to you. I trust in you Lord, grant me perserverance to endure to the end, Amen

There are some strong messages throughout the film – I’ve listed three of them here:

• “The days of my life were all prepared before I’d even lived one day.” Psalm 139.16 (The Message)

• “But God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” Romans 5.6 (ESV)

• “Since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.” Romans 5.1 (NIV)

We maybe think that films like Kung Fu Panda have nothing to say about Christianity, but these films have strong messages, along with the books we read, TV programs we watch and music we listen to. We need to listen out for their messages and ask whether they are really true.

We should use these films as an opportunity to ask ourselves and our parents - what does the bible say about these things? We need to question the messages contained and how they present the truth. I’ve learnt that while there is a real need to protect our children from inappropriate influences, on the whole, it’s not what you watch but how you watch, its not what you read, but how you read that determines the influence. So next time you watch Kung Fu Panda, may it remind you that each of us is loved, special and can find inner peace only through the love of God in Jesus Christ.

Its been two years since I blogged my way through Calvin’s Institutes and I have decided the time has come to make 2012 the year of Augustine! The two books people are most familiar with are his autobiography, Confessions and the City of God. The City of God is Augustine’s defence of Christianity from the accusation that it was the cause of Rome’s fall to the Barbarians in 410 AD. It’s a long book consisting of 22 books across 1000 pages. I’ve split up the book into a daily reading plan and will write a post for each of the 22 books.

After being consumed by Calvin’s Institutes during 2009 I know that classic theology texts are not everyone’s idea of fun. So the question needs to be asked: “Why bother spending so much time and energy reading and writing about a book written 1600 years ago? What possible relevance could it have for our world today?” I hope to be able to answer this better by the end of 2012, but for now, here are five reasons I believe this is a valuable  exercise:

1. Augustine was writing at the time of changing cultural philosophy. He was writing during the ascendancy of Christianity in the Roman Empire, over the previously established paganism. His arguments for why this happened and explanation of the relative fortunes of each will surely be instructive for our time when we see the opposite trend. Christianity is now in the decline in Western Europe and secularism is taking its place. How will Augustine’s explanations stand the test of time?
2. Calvin continually referred to Augustine. In the Institutes that I read in 2009, Augustine was the one person that John Calvin referred to again and again as the most reliable and informative church father on the many theological issues that he discussed. I am intrigued to read Augustine himself and uncover more of what Calvin saw in the writing and teachings of this great teacher.
3. I want to take the road less travelled. Short attention spans and Wikipedia are the order of our day. Who can be bothered reading an ancient text for enjoyment – just read the wiki and move on. We can only read a certain number of books in our lifetime – I want to read the ones that are the greatest theology books ever written. With my commute I can manage to read 3 or 4 pages a day for a year and get through an all-time classic on the train instead of playing Angry Birds.
4. Augustine is a central figure of both protestant and catholic traditions. He is someone whom both traditions call upon for different reasons. I believe that understanding him better will help me appreciate my own roots, and also those who have drawn from these same roots on the other side of The Reformation divide.
5. It will deepen my theological understanding. Like reading Calvin’s Institutes, reading this book from the 5th century will challenge my understanding of Christian theology and how to apply it to our current time. By challenging myself to write a 700 word post summarising the main points and demonstrating its relevance to our own day it will stretch my ability to apply ancient truth to modern life. Taking historic Christianity and speaking into today’s world is my aim – how better to develop this passion than with such a book?

So, here I go, look out for the first post on Book 1 in the next couple of weeks, let’s see what Augustine brings us during 2012…

Last week’s Economist reports that the number of people in England calling themselves members of the Church of England has fallen from 40% to 20% since 1983. I would suspect a similar trend is occurring in Scotland. I asked myself: If people are leaving the established church should the remnants of their cultural connections be mourned or appreciated? Should I be grieved that people no longer know the King that they sing of in “Hark the Heralds”, or should I be glad that at least they find some shadow of significance in these cultural relics?

As I reflected on this I thought of Jesus’ approach to people – he was able to simultaneously welcome all regardless of their shallow understanding or commitment, while also putting his finger on the pressure points of his followers. His deep spirituality didn’t repel him from the half-hearted jew (Zacchaeus), or the proud know-it-all (Nicodemus) or the woman caught in adultery – he was attracted to them, and them to him. There was an embracing, non-judgemental, non-threatening acceptance of people he met, in fact, of every person he met. His embrace was not determined by their attitude or depth of belief, but by his own. He loved people and met people just where they were, without pressurising them to conform to a standard before they were eligible to receive his love.

And yet while this never changed throughout his life, there ultimately came a moment to challenge their shallow understanding. He wasn’t content to leave them as they were, but wanted to take them deeper into what it means to be follow him. We see the pressure points throughout his ministry, for example with the rich young ruler and the challenge to denounce his material possessions. However, it is in John chapter 6 that this is brought most clearly into view. Three times we read of Jesus challenging his hearers – firstly the crowd after they had been fed and Jesus challenges them that they are only seeking their physical needs (John 6.26), then the disillusioned crowd who don’t understand his metaphor of unity (v60-66), and finally we even see it with the disciples – “Do you also want to leave?” he asks them (v67).

Once it comes, the incisive call of Christ cuts deeply and many decided that this is the end of their interest in this Rabbi. Sadly his embracing love was eventually rejected by the majority of people who initially followed him. For at the heart of the love which caused him to embrace all mankind is the call to renounce all other lesser loves that compete for our attention. Peter realised this and knew he had nowhere else to turn “Lord, to whom shall we go, you have the words of eternal life” (v68). 

The important thing for the UK is not retaining the moralistic values that are remnants of our Christian heritage, but for those who profess to follow Christ to rediscover both the embracing and incisive aspects of Christ’s call. Too many of us focus only on one side, leaving people either unclear (and unconvinced) regarding our convictions, or doubting our love and compassion (so they are not attracted to what we say). Christians must hold these two in tension – embrace all, irrespective of belief, lifestyle or attitude and this will naturally bring people into communities where we can unpack the incisive aspects of Christ’s call from a shared understanding and mutual respect.

We must also be sensitive to the means and methods we employ in communicating these two aspects – social media, church services, home groups and community activities should all communicate both of these aspects, but in very different ways and in different proportions. Lets make sure we don’t mix up the order (and balance) that Jesus exemplified, and be so incisive that no one is embraced, or so embracing that no one is changed.

Here is my collection of articles on his writing:

Hitch-22: Looking for Wilberforce and findings Hitchens

God Is Not Great:

• Chapter 1: A Passionate Plea
• Chapter 2: Religion – virtue or vice?
• Chapter 3: You aren’t what you eat
• Chapter 4: Caution: Religion can be hazardous to your health
• Chapter 5: The Stench of Chronological Snobbery

So I walked into the bookshop and looked for the biography section, once there I looked under “W” – no Wilberforce biographies to speak of. “Perhaps they are listed by author?” I thought, so proceeded to “H”. As I glanced along the various H biographies, there he was staring back at me, not William Wilberforce but Christopher Hitchens, and his memoirs, Hitch-22. This would be interesting I thought as I picked it up – flicking through the pages I became transfixed by his younger pictures and those of his family. “What happened to this guy to make him hate religion so much?” I asked myself and decided in that instant to read it.

Hitchens introduces his memoirs from his sickbed – ill with the throat cancer that is hastening his advance towards the final chapter of his life. My copy is a re-edition, with a new foreword, as he now reflects that the first part of the book was unknowingly written with ”a strong preoccupation with impending death”. This awareness gives him a heightened sense of irony as he begins his work by reminiscing on the day his erroneous obituary appeared in a magazine. He then moves to his family and childhood upbringing, moving chronologically up until his graduation, after which the book skips through different themes rather than a strict chronology.

Without giving too much away, his chapter on his mother provides a clear motivation for his feelings towards religion in general and Christianity in particular. After reading the things he had to deal with as a young man I can honestly understand why he sees such vice in religion. Indeed, I would have probably felt the same had I gone through such experiences. As always with anyone who has an aggressive anti-Christian philosophy, the roots of this begin in broken relationships, facile explanations and hypocritical believers.

But through it all I found myself warming to the man and finding in him a literary kinship that I wasn’t expecting after reading his God Is Not Great. So to summarise, here are the things I really like about Christopher Hitchens:

1. His love of literature – he has read more books, poets and plays than I could ever hope to and he can quote from hundreds of authors to colour his prose. I too love literature, but come from it from the perspective of someone who studied the sciences at school and only discovered the classics in my 20s when I decided I needed to improve my vocabulary. I didn’t have the privilege of education that he had, but share his love for it, in fact if I could do my time again I would do my best to get on the PPE degree – Politics, Philosophy and Economics.
2. His concern for the oppressed – reading his memoirs its easy to see what motivates him. He identifies with the down-trodden, the voiceless minorities of militant dictators, the political enemies of the state – all these draw out his love. He champions the cause of those without political power and he is willing to put his name on the line in the cause of creating a more civilised and just society.
3. His desire to make a difference – he has made it his aim in life to spend time travelling and living in conflict zones. During the 70s, 80s and 90s he sought to ride the crest of the political wave across the world’s most troubled countries. He seeks to create a more liberal, open-minded society by raising awareness and uncovering injustice in some of the most forgotten places on earth.
4. His pursuit of perfection in writing – as someone who has spent most of their career sharpening their ability to craft an argument and present a case, his relentless pursuit of the perfect adjective and striking analogy leaves me in awe. His power is in his prose, and he refines and refines it until it is as sharp as his wit and as penetrating as his intellect.
5. His intellectual rigour – strange as it may seem, I actually appreciate the robustness of his thinking and the challenge he presents to his opponents. On the whole, he doesn’t allow his loyalty to friends or his political allegiances to bias his views. He seeks to think things through from first principles – a character trait I admire and seek to emulate. Although often he is more forgiving of himself than his enemies.

Interestingly, he describes at one point his loves and hates “In the hate column: dictatorship, religion, stupidity, demagogy, censorship, bullying and intimidation. In the love column: literature, irony, humour, the individual and the defence of free expression.” I share many of these values and find in Hitchens a like-minded thinker, someone who ruthlessly examines his own beliefs and the world around him to understand the times we live in, but who also identifies with the rights of the individual to live their lives free of interference and superstition.

Yet through it all I found an undercurrent of sadness – the failure, within Hitchens own lifetime, of the socialist system to produce the just and fair society in practice that it promised in theory; the impact the excesses of his bohemian lifestyle had on his own family and finally and the utter hopelessness of his secular atheism. As he closes the book he gets to the root of this dilemma – how to be so sure of his materialistic secularism? Towards the end of the final chapter he states that “It is not that there are no certainties, it is that it is an absolute certainty that there are no certainties”. How can someone so obviously intelligent and penetratingly logical come up with such a statement? “The only certainty in life is that I am right” is what he says in effect. He teaches his followers that there is nothing certain in life, just the certainty of hopelessness. 

In an ironic twist he even celebrates his open-mindedness as he closes the book: “To be an unbeliever is not merely to be “open-minded”. It is rather, a decisive admission of uncertainty that is dialectically connected to the repudiation of the totalitarian principle, in the mind as well as in politics.” But this open-mindedness applies only to those things his pre-assumptions tell him are correct – that there is no God, no spiritual aspect to life, no greater being than humans, nothing beyond the physical. Based upon these assumptions he is happy to entertain any question, but challenge these assumptions and you are either a naive imbecile or a power-wielding megalomanic.

For what Hitchens is missing is humility, the admission that we don’t know it all – we cannot say for certain that what we cannot see is not there. His pride and bitterness blinds him to the possibility of a greater purpose in life. If there really is no certainty or hope then I’m all on for an honest facing of the facts and stoic acceptance of our fate. But if there is even a glimmer of hope, then surely those who search their own assumptions and allow what they experience in their lives and what they know deep in their hearts to challenge their assumptions deserve some respect?

There is a middle way – experiential faith. There is an element of knowing God that requires our obedience, as Calvin says “all correct knowledge of God, originates in obedience”. It begins by participating in the process of faith by assessing the historical evidence, refusing to accept blinkered explanations and challenging our pre-suppositions. The first step is one of reason and logic, the second one of trust. First Jesus says to us – “If anyone chooses to do God’s will, he will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own” (John 7.17 and also see John 14.21), then he says “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed” (John 20.29).

It is called faith, not because there is no evidence, but because the evidence leads me to believe in something my eyes cannot see. Faith is not inconsistent with reason and logic, but rather on their own they are not sufficient to experience a relationship with God. Hitchens already knows everything he needs to about God, he doesn’t need more evidence or proofs - the question is will he humble himself before this God or demand more from him? That is his Hitch-22 and it is the question we all face.

Jesus speaks about ravens in Luke 12.24. The ravens don’t have jobs – they don’t get up early like Mummy & Daddy to go to work and earn money. They don’t have a piggy bank or savings in the bank to pay for food. And yet God feeds them everyday – if that is what he does for them what will he do for his children, so don’t worry.

Also read in the book of Kings that the ravens fed Elijah! God could have fed Elijah himself, like the manna he sent to the Israelites – but he chose to use the ravens as his messengers, why?. So we can learn that God feeds the ravens and the ravens then feed Elijah – see the hand of God guiding his animals to provide for his child. A lesson for all of life.

Reminds us of God’s care for his children – says in the book of James that “every good and perfect gift is from above” – from God. Even our food, which we think comes from the supermarket in a plastic bag and then goes in the fridge came from God:

• He gave your mummy and daddy the ability to earn money
• He gave you parents that care about you and want the best for you
• He gave us a good climate with lots of rain (!) & blessed the harvest to produce food
• He gave us peace in our land so that companies can sell food in safety
• We can buy it without fear of robbery and that our money will be accepted by the company we pay

All this is from God and its why we thank him before we eat the food. So the next time you say Grace, remember the ravens and the unseen hand of God behind everything we enjoy. And remember that even gifts from heaven are sometimes wrapped in ordinary boxes – but they are very precious from God our father.

The final chapter in the final book describes a wonderful scene of uninterrupted intimacy with God in the new creation. 

1. As we come to the end of our studies in Revelation, how has studying this book blessed you over the last few months (chapter 1.3 & 22.7b)? What have you found difficult to understand? What questions to you have unresolved? 
2. V1, how does the river of life illustrate the work of the Holy Spirit? How will our experience of the Holy Spirit be enlarged and deepened in the new creation? 
3. What are the parallels between this chapter and the Garden of Eden? How has the tree of life changed? How does God’s role in the two gardens’ compare (Genesis 3.8a)? 
4. V10, how does this verse compare with Daniel 12.9? What then is the connection between v10 and v11? What should be the impact of this “open prophecy” on our life (2 Peter 3.10-14)? 
5. V15 breaks the glorious scene with a note of reality that heaven is not for all (also compare 9.21 & 21.8). How do these verses balance our tendency to emphasise the intellectual aspects of salvation more than the resulting behavioural changes? What would you say to someone who believes that everyone will be saved, in the light of these verses and others? 
6. What is Jesus’ final encouragement to his people (v7, 12, 20)? How do we handle the fact that it has now been 2000 years since Jesus promised this (2 Peter 3.8-9)?
7.  As we finish our studies on Revelation has this journey made you more aware of the hope of heaven or the reality of the Second Coming? In what practical ways can we deepen our expectation and anticipation of heaven as individuals and a church?

The final chapter reminds us of a love letter from a long lost relative – “I am on my way, I’m coming soon, please be ready when I arrive”. The arrival may have been a long time coming in our counting but from the other side of eternity the waiting will seem like a momentary stopover between connecting flights on the way to see our loved one.

“Since then you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts on things above where Christ is seated at the right hand of God. Set your mind on things above, not on earthly things.” Colossians 3.1-2