One of the deepest problems in understanding real Christianity as opposed to pseudo Christianity is in the need to know the difference between belief and faith. This is an interesting problem because when we use the words belief and faith we tend to assign them different meanings but this is not the case in scripture. By this I mean that the word that is translated as belief and the word that is translated as faith is the same word in the Greek – Πίστος. We tend to consider belief as the giving intellectual assent to a proposition where as faith is the need to put that assent to the test. We can vacillate between two opinions and when pressed believe one to be true, but if we have to put our life on the line between the two opinions we might prefer not to put our faith in our belief. Galileo was an example of this, he believed the world to be round, but he chose not to die for his belief, instead he put his faith in something other than in his belief.

While all the world feasts declaring, with pride, the ‘Christmas Spirit’ in which they celebrate and feeling assured that they somehow bear witness to the advent of Christ, those who truly know Christ weep. Those who won’t join in with the throng are treated with suspicion. Just how real is the world’s rejoicing at the coming of Christ or more importantly how real is the Church’s celebration at the coming of Christ?

In the parable of the sower Jesus says that the seed that is sown is the word. Now we know that the word of God is Jesus Himself, so that the hearing heart which really responds to the word becomes a child of God. There is something profound and deeply challenging in this because it raises some pertinent questions in relation to the Christianity which is proclaimed in the Church today.

Whenever the government of a country is confronted with a moral dilemma in the delivery of its services it automatically sets up a committee to investigate the shortcomings of its administration. This approach has many admirable benefits to the government. Firstly, it makes the government feel good that it is doing something to address the deficiency. Secondly, it enables the government to effectively do nothing at all for they are waiting for the committee to arrive with its findings and when the findings do arrive they can always call a new inquiry. Thirdly, and most importantly, it enables the government to assuage its guilt at its own neglect toward its citizenry without the need to repent of its past sins.
Christians do exactly the same thing. Whenever they are confronted with their own shortcomings toward God they hold a festival. They celebrate God's goodness. This enables them to, firstly, feel good that they are doing something in addressing their own deficiency. Secondly, it enables them to put off doing anything constructive about their failings. Thirdly, and most importantly they are able to assuage their guilt while doing nothing at all towards God to repent of their past sins. This is the beauty of the annual Easter ritual!
This deficiency is no more apparent than on this day which the Church has given the name Good Friday. What exactly is good about it? The name is reminiscent of the activity of the modern day spin doctors who try desperately to turn a negative into a positive. It is surely a day of shame for the Church. Year after year the same sinners present their unrepentant, unchanged hearts before God to offer up their praise at His mercy. The death of the Lord is celebrated without an ounce of real sorrow in the collective heart of the Church. If there was real sorrow the Church would be purer, more alive with the power of His love. As it is, year by year nothing changes.

One of the consequences of the Christian belief that the New Testament is sealed is that rather than God being closer to His people He has become more distant. Jesus supposedly lay down His life to draw us infinitely deeper into the life of God. After the resurrection He tells the woman, Mary Magdalene, at the tomb “…go to My brothers and say to them I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God”. If we are called into this intimate relationship where we are no longer slaves but friends, brothers of the Lord, sharing in common a Father and a God, then our words should be constantly alive and relevant, and rather than being sealed up in a book, words bearing life should still be flowing from our lips.
Under the Law God's people knew of His love and grace because through the generations He sent His prophets, spokesmen, to correct them, whose words were His words and to be respected and obeyed. But in sealing up scripture the Church has put a distance between itself and God. The Church has acted in much the same way as the people in the time of Moses acted when they were so terrified by their encounter with God, when He appeared with fire on the mountain to deliver the ten commandments, that they declared to Moses, “Speak to us yourself and we will listen; but let not God speak to us lest we die.” We are told that “… the people stood at a distance, while Moses approached the thick cloud where God was”. The Church too has acted in this way keeping a 'respectful' distance, a very long way down the mountain, from the Lord.
The curious effect of this distancing itself from God has created within the Church the art of theological posturing. Because the Church believes that they are children of God, because in there understanding the scripture says that they are, they create for themselves an intellectual illusion of their relationship with God, without ever becoming what they proclaim themselves to be. It is therefore possible for Christians to declare that they are saved, and washed in the blood, and children of God, while still declaring their absolute enslavement to sin. “None of us are perfect” they declare, “God doesn't see me when He looks at me, but rather he sees Jesus”. These and similarly juvenile utterances are what I call 'God wearing rose coloured glasses' theology and speaking such nonsense is part of the reason that the Church is held, quite rightly, in derision by the unbeliever.
It is a strange fact that those born under the Law had more expectation of a word from God than those who are supposedly born under grace! It is also surprising that those who believe that they are living under a New Covenant have less expectation of a revelation from God than those who lived under the Old Covenant. So because Paul writes that the Law, though good, resulted in death for those who stumbled in it, that must mean that Christians, who supposedly live according to grace but stumble in the same way as those who live under Law, have to be in a worse state. For if neither the Law nor love poured out through the Spirit can transform us what way is there left for us to keep the commands of God?