Does it matter what you believe?

All manner of atrocities have been committed in the name of religion. Their perpetrators earnestly believed they were acting on God's behalf. Like Paul. And there's the crunch. We are taught that we need to hear the voice of God and obey it. But of this "hearing"... some say like "I felt God was telling me to..." and I wonder are they really hearing God's voice? What if one party earnestly believes God is saying X and another party Y and X and Y are major issues and mutually exclusive? Is this how splits and new denominations happen in the church?  There are rather generous estimates of up to 43,000 denominations within perhaps 40 main variations. Which gives the new convert plenty of choice. So does it matter what you believe?

If the deep outer veneers of difference are scraped off, what core value, common vision is there that defines a true Christian? Like the simplicity of Peter's "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house".

I was pleasantly surprised to find this discussion of what it means to be a Christian on the BBC site - surprised because my son-in-law eschews the BBC considering it to be very biased. The site says "It's about a friendship - a friendship with Jesus Christ." But what does it mean to have a friendship with someone that cannot be sensed in the usual way? I am reminded of Chocky who, in the story, is thought to be a childhood invention but turns out to be real. And here is my conundrum: those seemingly more stable Christians with whom I fellowship will claim that they do have a friendship with Jesus, that they hear Him speaking to them, feel His presence, and so on. I've thought I did but now I am not so sure. Don't get me wrong - I love the concept, so aptly portrayed in the Narnia books, like But no one except Lucy knew that as it circled the mast it had whispered to her, "Courage, dear heart," and the voice, she felt sure, was Aslan's, and with the voice a delicious smell breathed in her face and I long for such an experience in my own life, a longing that is as close to "faith" as I can muster. Or maybe, horrors, my spirit has somehow grown cold like the dwarfs within the stable in The Last Battle.

On the other hand I've seen some pretty amazing things that I can put down to the hand of God. That I got married at all, let alone to an amazing woman and with resulting four amazing children. Even my closest friends at the time agreed it was an unlikely thing to happen. And more recently, after waiting in hope for so many years, J and S's adoption of a Thai child happening so fast and at such a time that one could not help comparing it with Joseph's sudden rise to second only to Pharoah. Or when I open my eyes and see creation in all its detail.

But I, being human, need constant reassurance of things unseen. Working on some scaffolding the other day I cantilevered a plank to help me reach, making the other end fast by a G-clamp to the scaffolding tower. It looked good. My knowledge of levers confirmed my observation. And yet still I very cautiously committed my weight to the projecting end of the plank. I needed more assurance than physics theory offered. And I need more assurance than Christian doctrine offers.

A recent visitor alluded to numerical patterns or "gematria" found in the scriptures, for example as purported by Vernon Jenkins with his 37 x 73 argument. This is all very fascinating but at the same time I am cautious. Many of the patterns only work in base 10 as this site observes, but then one might argue that the decimal system is God given because He gave our hands and feet 10 digits. And does Vernon also believe that the Earth is flat or is at least the centre of the universe?

Another guy came up with the Bible Wheel but has more recently debunked his own theory and now no longer calls himself a Christian. I followed this story because it is unusual for a theorist to publically recant. Without reading every word it seems that he fell into that trap of emphasising data that supported his theory whilst disregarding the rest. Commonly known as a biased sample. I think Christians are wonderfully good at this - wonderfully because it takes some guts, some perseverance and commitment, to persistently believe one thing when so much evidence points another way.

And thus Paul argues in the book of Romans: for what can be known about God is plain to them [unbelievers], because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools. Doubtless Richard Dawkins would not agree. If I had to choose between him and Paul I'd choose the latter any day, but still I find Paul's argument curiously hollow. Conversely the anthropic principle says the world is as it is (all those physical constants having just the right value to sustain life as we know it and all that) because here we are to prove it, and this also seems to me a hollow argument lacking substance.

In all these musings I find myself coming back to the man Jesus and his claims of deity as recorded in the Gospels. But that was a long time ago and, like Trumpkin the dwarf, I find myself thinking "Do you believe all those old stories?" and "But who believes in Aslan nowadays?".  In this story Trumpkin's unbelief mercifully ends with "Son of Earth, shall we be friends?". Maybe that was just  the author's fancy.

I crave such mercy.

The last temptation of Christ

Winchester Royal County Hospital was where I was born, where at age 6 my tonsils were removed and where my mother took me for speech therapy.

Winchester Royal County Hospital

We have just finished our annual convention - for those of you unfamiliar with such things think lots of long sermons strung together with praise and good food. True, some of this "word" touched me but, frankly, some did not. What I mean is - I sit there for over an hour and think - what was all that about? Mind you, I have not heard anyone else here admit such defeat: what I am hearing is that it was all wonderful. But then neither have I let on except herewith and to Ali. Surely needless verbosity is not implicit in "it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe"? For one who speaks little I wonder why it has to take so long to convey what is often such a simple message.

When I was small they said I was slow to talk and got along by pointing and grunting whenever I wanted something. They said I was lazy. Hence the speech therapy. Since then I've come a long way but still can find speaking difficult. I don't think ahead fast enough so I loose out in arguments and need notes if speaking publicly. As a result I tend to give up and too easily leave it to the many others with louder voices.

I can identify with my namesake who, when a university gave him an honorary doctorate, said "I cannot find the words to thank you, but if there was an organ here I could thank you". This man was similarly inept with words and social skills.

There is immense pressure to conform to the norm and yet the same person found the freedom to say "He is Brahms, and my profound respect. But I am myself and I prefer my own stuff" and "They want me to compose in a different way; I could, but I must not. Out of thousands, God gave talent to me. One day, I shall have to give an account of myself. How would the Father in Heaven judge me if I followed others and not Him?" If only I had the guts to accept my lot - but, hang on, I do accept it else why this post? - if only the louder others could accept that some of us are not so articulate as they are...

There is similar social pressure to wear shoes. In theory I go along with this "I cannot tell a lie, it's the sensuality, the physical sensation, the pure pleasure of it, combined with not only a sense of liberation and freedom, but I have also recently embraced the nonconforming aspect of it." But during the convention I got tired of people looking down at my feet and making comments. Even when wearing sandals I was asked were my feet cold? I wasn't quick enough to parry (see above) but afterwards thought I should have asked why neither of us was wearing gloves or balaclava.

Paul McCartney said "I used to think anyone doing anything weird was weird. Now I know that it is the people that call others weird that are weird."

And "Steve Jobs' message through his barefoot habit is that he is different and that he is not stuck in the system like others. I have read somewhere that Steve Jobs went to do an important deal without his shoes and that this annoyed the person he was meeting so much."

I'm halfway through reading the controversial historical novel The Last Temptation of Christ. Though unashamedly inaccurate, it conveys rather well the struggles Jesus must have gone through to resist the temptations of the flesh, although the English translation leaves much to be desired. It portrays a very human Jesus even if somewhat stereotyped. I can identify a bit with this sort of holiness because I, too, am human.

If, then you or I "through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live" - if then you or I ever managed to do this mortify thing, would any of our colourful character be left? Are my peculiarities posited in my flesh? Surely it ought not leave us void, as if "Aslan has come and is not like the Aslan we have believed in and longed for? Or as if the sun rose one day and were a black sun. Or as if you drank water and it were dry water"? And yet we Christian folk continually bandy about this mortifying yet never achieving it, seemingly ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

For me, if only it could be that "this poor man cried, and the LORD heard him, and saved him out of all his troubles."