Jesus was fully human too

When it comes to Jesus it can be very difficult (impossible?) to understand the dichotomy of fully God and fully man. This often leaves me imagining him as God trapped inside a human body. However, this isn't right. To be fully human he would have had to have limitations. Could it be that he even had limitations on his understanding? Ok, I can't find this verse right now so please correct me if I am mistaken but I believe the Bible says that we cannot see God because it would be so awesome and overwhelming that we would die right then and there. Our understanding of God is so limited by what can be processed and fathomed by our finite brains. Would Christ have fully understand God? Would he have really known the glory of heaven that he was to ascend back to and sit at the right hand of God or did he know only as much as God was able to reveal to him with his human brain? Don't get me wrong, I think he had a better understand than I do, or any of us really will but still, was it limited?

He must have had to trust God. Actually trust him that this was the best decision, that glory was waiting beyond death, that his death would bring salvation to the world. How does this relate to John 11, the death of Lazarus? Well, I did say loosely but we were discussing it in a Bible discussion group and came across the verse "Jesus wept" (John 11:35). the question, of course, is why? The easy and obvious answer is that he was sad that his friend died, duh. Granted. But my first reaction to that was still: isn't that weird? Why would he cry moments before seeing his friend's tomb if he knew that his friend would be raised from the dead in just a few minutes? He should be anxious to get it done and rejoicing if anything. But, instead, he weeps.

From a human perspective this makes sense. A human body and mind are bound by time. Even though Christ knew that Lazarus could be raised (and that it would happen) he still had to trust this (if you look he gives the glory to God and thanks God for doing what he asked, Christ could still only do it through the power of his father being limited by the human form) and at that moment his friend was dead. I have a feeling this is does not make a boatload of sense the way that it is written but the main point is that Christ was human. The fully human part is just as important as the fully God part. There was likely a time in his life that God was revealing his plan to him, times when he was afraid, times when he didn't really know what his future held but just that God had a plan of redemption and that he was part of it. It is hard for me to wrap my teeny brain around this. Challenge me if something seems blasphemous but this is hefty stuff (for me at least~!)

i could really go for some ice cream

As seen on a poster/ad just outside Laura Secord:
"It just isn't Easter without a Laura Secord cream egg"

hmmm. is that what Easter has become? According to the logic of this poster Christ could have stayed behind the rock forever but as long as we all get Laura Secord cream eggs there is still something to celebrate.

Update on argentina/mexico wallowing: I don't think I did a thorough job yesterday, i think i had fun by accident. i've moved on to denial/avoidance until sunday.

Less than fundamental

It's almost 6am. The tossing and turning started soon after the lamp was turned off around 2am and ended with me turning on my computer about twenty minutes ago. Tomorrow promises to be a long day without sleep but one can only lie awake for so long without giving in to it.

In my boredom I searched random blogs and after many chinese, portuguese and computer blogs that I quickly bypassed, one caught my attention. It's a blog by a Christian who considers himself a seeker and (I think like me) wants so much to have the truth from the New Testament but still has questions.

He has articulated some of the thoughts I have been having much better than I have been able to. It is appealing to get a taste of some of the more liberal Christian theology (still reliant on the Bible but willing to accept that it may just not be as simple as one prayer).

If anyone takes the time to read his blog (I recommend "Father, forgive them" and "an extravagant hope") I would be very interested to hear what you think.

Protestant Guilt

Being from a Catholic background I thought I was familiar with guilt. However, at least that guilt came with a clause whereby I could utter a few half-hearted hail mary's and be on with it (not meant to be an accurate depiction of the Catholic faith, just my own experience).

The last semester (or last 8 months I suppose) God and I took a little break from each other. It had come to the point where I couldn't remember what having faith felt like and I was tired of trying to reach God. I still had all of the head-knowledge but couldn't say whether I believed it. Strangely enough I can say that I believe that if there is a God then it is the Christian God and that Christ came to earth to save us from our sins but it really is true that knowing it intellectually isn't the same as knowing it 'in my heart'. It has taken some time but I can see that a large contributor to this time of disinterest in my faith stemmed from extreme guilt. This guilt was surrounded by performance guilt. Sharing my faith was not something to do because it changed my life so wholly that I could not help but tell others but out of obligation. Failure to do so with my family caused great distress, especially when I would go home and instead of focusing on improving my relationship with them and showing them God through my life I would be looking for chances to slip in the whole gospel but each time shying away.

Assurance of salvation, another concept that I could teach but not accept. The guilt of teaching it to others and even the shame of being involved but constantly doubting my own salvation made me ask God why he would give some the ability to accept this gift and not others.

Another confession: I dislike Christian literature. THe early Christians had the Bible and the teachings of elders and others but they didn't need to emmerse themselves in John Piper to make their faith relevant. But everyone is constantly reading all of these 'how to be more effective at sharing your faith' books and the guilt would set in because I didn't feel like I could be a good or productive Christian unless I got joy from reading these. I have so little time to read, what if I just want to learn about science and art and history too?

So I have taken a step back. I thought that I would just get over this lull and continue mostly where I had left off but that wouldn't have solved any of the questions I have or reassured me. God and I are starting to talk again, slowly. I am not going to actively seek to share my faith, I may not even yet refer to myself as a christian (should a christian not represent Christ? I do not wish to misrepresent him while I am seeking myself), I am not going to try to read books on evangelism or tithing or anything else except the Bible. I'll go to churh. I may not worship, I may. I am seeking a relationship with Christ. If and when this becomes a reality in my life, if and when I can say that I love Christ as my saviour (I never could say this, thus another source of guilt and questioning) then out of that love I will call myself a christian and I will share my faith with those around me.

Here goes the great experiment. I will be standing at the door, knocking.