One of the most misunderstood scriptures in the New Testament is Romans chapter 7. It does not matter what brand of Christian you are talking to, if the subject of holiness arises and with it the commands to walk in the image of Christ, free from sin, the automatic retort is to fire off a few choice verses of Romans chapter 7. Poor old Paul, it seems, just couldn't help himself, “The good that I wish, I do not do, but I commit the very evil that I do not wish” and the church delights in his imagined frailty - to their collective ruin. For in this, as in much of their understanding of scripture, they fulfill Peter's statement concerning Paul, “in his letters… are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort as they do all the scriptures, to their own destruction.”

From the church's understanding of scripture Paul is a tragic figure stumbling in all of his ways (just as they the church do), a hypocrite not living what he preached; but this is not what Paul is revealing in this chapter. As is so often the case, people take a text out of context to justify their own crooked walk. To get to the heart of what Paul is talking about we have to go back to the previous chapter. In Chapter 6 Paul says, “Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? May it never be! How shall we who died still live in it?” Then he explains how we have been baptized into Christ's death that “we too might walk in newness of life.” For “our old man was crucified with Him, that our body of sin might be destroyed, that we should no longer be slaves of sin” Paul continues by saying, “Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body that you should obey its lusts,”… “for sin shall not be master over you for you are not under law but under grace.” From such a beginning it seems inconceivable that Paul is now saying, in the very next chapter, “but hey don't worry about it, none of us are perfect!” But this is exactly what the church believes that he is saying!

Christianity is categorized as a faith based religion. Before the Reformation this really was not the case because everyone was baptized at birth and you simply were part of the church. But ever since the Reformation and the questioning of church authority saw Luther highlighting the text in Romans 3:28 “… a man is justified by faith”, by adding to it the word “only”, the fixation of the church has been upon faith. That is faith as opposed to works. What this has resulted in has been an eruption of men who claim to have faith but reveal nothing of the works that necessarily flow from real faith. We have the spectacle of members of different denominations joining themselves together, in a spirit of ecumenicalism, proclaiming themselves to be fellow Christians but living divided because of doctrinal differences. We see the arguments between so called fundamentalists and so called liberal Christians over what is essential belief. We see the secular argument that you can either have reason or faith but not both. We see street preachers literally stand on a bible and say they are standing on the word of God. There is so much confusion, so much hokum, that for there to be any such thing as true faith it must be, by and large, hidden from the hearts and minds of those who profess themselves to be Christian. This then is an exploration into what it means to have faith.

The almost wholesale belief within the church of substitutionary atonement is a remarkable testimony to the absence of spiritual insight within this supposedly august body. Substitutionary atonement is by definition impossible it is a non sequitur, for the entire purpose of atonement is to restore unity to a broken relationship. Vicarious suffering, though a noble gesture, is pointless if the desired goal is at-one-ment, which is what atonement actually means. If, however, the desired goal of theological speculation is to achieve an understanding of how one can feel forgiven in the face of a justifiably angry God then vicarious sacrifice for divine appeasement just might fit the bill. In fact it appears to be just the ticket, for the church has grabbed hold of it with universal enthusiasm. But if your desire is to know the Father, to be one with the Father in unity with the Son, then a vicarious sacrifice is nonsensical. The reason it is nonsensical is that the entire Christian message is that we have been redeemed not from the punishment of sin so much as from its power. We have been made alive together with Him.

 Nearly 2000 years ago euphoric scenes were witnessed in Jerusalem. The city was shaken by the power of the outpouring of praise as Jesus rode into the city. The streets were alive with the throng as even the children cried out shouts of praise – “Hosanna! (Save I pray!) Blessed is here who comes in the name of the Lord.” Excitement filled the streets for they were witnessing prophecy fulfilled – “Behold your King is coming seated on a donkey’s colt”. The people rejoiced with exultation. Had they not witnessed the miracles! Had they not seen signs and wonders! Was this not the hope of Israel! Here was their King! God’s rule had come.

There is much written and spoken and misunderstood concerning this subject, as if election was some incomprehensible mystery which imparted some greater than expected reward to those who presumed themselves to be the recipients of such choice.

In our very being, our being born, the choice of our existence is not our own. Election is a free gift. How could our being born be based on works? God elected to give life, not on works (for how could it be other wise?) but on His choice. Does this sound surprising?