Question: when is a holiday not a holiday?

Answer: When you're running around like a lunatic for a week trying to keep up with 60 teenagers whilst teaching them the gospel!

Ah Venture. I do love it - that is when I don't hate it. It's exhausting and emotionally draining. But it's also joyful and gloriously uplifting.

So, things I've learnt during the past week:

1. "And he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, to be put into effect when the times have reached their fulfilment - to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head, even Christ." Ephesians 1:9-10 taught in a classic memory verse style-e.

2. "You were taught with regard to your former way of life, to put off your old self which is being corrupted by its deceitful desires; to be made new in the attitude of your minds and to put on the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness." Ephesians 4:22-24
P.S. You have to sing it to the tune of Aladdin's 'A Whole New World'. It's a less well known memory verse strategy, but a hugely effective one!

3. Paintball is NOT for me. I'd always thought as much but decided I should give it a go before passing judgment. Perhaps I was missing out on something amazing? I wasn't. Unless by amazing you mean painful and tear inducing. I got shot in the head (ouch) which was then compounded by the accidental coming together of a team-mate's gun and the exact spot on my noggin that had just been so violently introduced to paint (double ouch). I decided to bow out and did so ungracefully and inelegantly. But not before I attracted a shot to the thigh that eventually yielded a bruise on such a scale as I'd never seen before and hopefully never will again. despite my lack of enthusiasm for the paintball experience I am strangely proud of that bruise.

4. Dead fish don't dance - more on that story later.

Excuse me, Mr Williams.

I'm annoyed. Irked; riled; angered; peeved; irritated; vexed; and any other word that Thesaurus.com desires to throw my way.

The source of my agitation? Mr Robbie Williams.

I would like to state from the outset that in general I've never really had a problem with Robbie. Some of his music is good and he's a first class entertainer. He does have a tendency to come across as a little obnoxious and arrogant at times, but show me an A-list pop star who doesn't!

It's his new single that's got me blogging. It's called Bodies and you can listen to it here.

Musically I think it's a return to form. Very catchy and it's got a good anthemic vibe come the end. But have you heard the lyrics? Here's a slightly abridged transcript for you:

God gave me the sunshine
Then showed me my lifeline
I was told it was all mine
Then I got laid on a ley line
What a day, what a day
And your Jesus really died for me
Then Jesus really tried for me

Bodies in the Bodhi tree
Bodies making chemistry
Bodies on my family
Bodies in the way of me
Bodies in the cemetery
And that’s the way it’s gonna be
All we’ve ever wanted is to look good naked
Hope that someone can take it
God save me rejection
From my reflection
I want perfection

Praying for the rapture
‘Cause it’s stranger getting stranger
And everything’s contagious
It’s the modern middle ages
All day every day
And if Jesus really died for me
Then Jesus really tried for me

Jesus didn’t die for you, what do you want?
(I want perfection)
Jesus didn’t die for you, what are you on?
Oh Lord(Jesus really died for you)
Ohh(Jesus really died for you)
(Jesus really died for you) Ohh

I've bolded the stuff that's causing me a problem. It's obvious that the song is an outworking of all sorts of things that Williams has been thinking about. His interest in spirituality has often been a feature of his songs and I don't believe that he's intending to offend with his lyrics. But offend he does. I'm loathe to use the word offend actually. It's bandied about too often these days and has lost any real meaning. It might be better to say these lyrics upset me.

I'm a Christian. The absolute core of my beliefs is that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, totally God, totally human, absolutely holy and pure, died an horrific and undeserved death in order to take the punishment that I deserve for my disobedience and rejection of God. This is a truth. Jesus died for me. Really. I would have no problem if Robbie was singing that Jesus didn't die for him, if that's how he feels. But it is heart-breaking to hear someone singing at me through the radio that my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ didn't die for me.

This also brings up an interesting situation. Who do I complain to? There's no real reason for me to complain to Williams (other than to correct him!) - he has a right to write and sing what he wants. Freedom of speech and all that. But should radio and TV stations be more responsible in what they are broadcasting? I'm 99% sure that if someone wrote a song denying in such terms something so integral to the Islamic faith, that the media would at the very least think twice before airing it. It is in fact only two lines of the song that truly affront. It would be very easy to edit out - they do it enough with swearing these days. You would be well within your rights to say, "But if it's only two lines then what's the big problem?" but those two lines - "Jesus didn't die for you", "Jesus didn't die for you, what are you on?" are killers. They come at the very end in the most anthemic part of the song and for Christians they have the capacity to cut to the heart.

Robbie's confusion and agnostic predilections are made clear by the fact that whilst he's singing these words the backing vocals are chiming, "Jesus really died for you". He would probably use that as his defence and it does diminish the insult a little. Although until I looked up the lyrics I thought that they were also singing "Jesus didn't die for you" - perhaps a slightly greater quality of diction is all that's required there!

Interestingly I've not heard a single word of complaint to any media outlet but I expect that a lot of Christians find themselves in a similar situation to myself - to whom do I complain? It makes me sad but for now I'll have to make do with responding to Mr Williams in a loud voice each time I hear his song: "Actually Jesus did die for me, thank you very much! Praise the Lord!"

G. Licious vs Hollywood

If you've had the misfortune to be a regular reader of my blog then you've probably gathered by now that I quite like to watch the odd film. According to the helpful but rather superfluous Labels function provided by Blogger I can tell you that it is currently the 3rd most blogged about topic on Ponderings and Ruminations - tied with TV but just pipping gripes.

I may love films but I can promise you I'm no actress. Can't be doing with all those people looking at me. I might actually be a very skilled thespian, but the world will just have to resign itself to the fact that it will never know.

But it occurred to me the other day that even if I was an outgoing type with all the talent of Judi Dench, the beauty of Jennifer Aniston and the wit of Sandra Bullock I'd probably never be able to be successful. Why? Because I'm a Christian. Now I'm not saying that I wouldn't make it because Christians are discriminated against in the industry (they may or may not be, I haven't a clue) but simply because there would be no roles for me. As a Christian I wouldn't want to swear in a movie and I would be uncomfortable about being in a film that featured sex outside of marriage - let alone actually be in a sex scene! With just those two stipulations I have pretty much blown my chances of a film career. How many films are there these days that I could get involved in? If I became a Christian after having become a successful actor then no doubt it would be possible to pick and choose roles in family friendly projects. But as a newbie trying to get a foot in the door I expect I'd be laughed out of Hollywood.

I don't know exactly what point I'm trying to make (you should all know by now that I'm rather prone to rambling musings!) but it's certainly something worth mulling over don't you think?

P.S. I am aware that I could easily be labelled a hypocrite. After all I watch a lot of films that I've stated that I wouldn't want to be in. But I do think that there's a difference between viewing something and endorsing or promoting it by being in it.

'Go into the whole world and proclaim the gospel...'

Some days I feel compelled to throw rocks at the Church of England. Today is such a day.

According to The Daily Telegraph's front page report a row has broken out within the Church regarding evangelism to Muslims. The Bishop of Rochester, the Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali has voiced concerns that not enough is being done to bring people of other faiths to Christianity. In response, other church leaders have criticised him for failing to show sensitivity to those following non-Christian religions.

This whole debacle has left me pretty gob-smacked. Follow my logic: Christians believe that the bible is God's true and complete word (don't get me started on 'Christians' who don't believe that!). Within that Word is what is known as The Great Commission, given by Jesus to his disciples following his death and resurrection and just before he ascended into heaven.

'Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. And when they saw him they worshipped him, but some doubted. And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age."' Matthew 28: 16-20

'Go and make disciples of all nations'. Not 'go and make disciples of the nations that haven't got their own religion. Please don't step on any toes.' All nations. I think that's pretty clear!
And why are Christians supposed to do this? Because 'whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned'. Mark 16: 16. Christians are called to spread the gospel out of love. Because of our longing for everyone to be saved from God's righteous judgement that is surely coming. I find it crazy that someone would be offended by my telling them about Jesus Christ because I am concerned for their eternal destiny. If someone of another faith evangelised to me in such a way - "I'm telling you this because I care about you and as such have a duty to tell you what I believe" - then I wouldn't be aghast at their arrogance. I would listen and thank them for their concern. I know that it wouldn't change my beliefs but neither would I have a paddy about their intolerance for my religion.

The largest misconception (clearly present in the Telegraph's report) appears to be that the idea that Christians want to evangelise to Musims because we see Islam as a threat to culture and religion. I can't speak for all Christians but I for one want to evangelise to all people (Muslims, Hindus, Jehovah's Witnesses, atheists, agnostics and everyone in between) in order that they might be saved by Jesus Christ and have assurance of a wonderful and eternal life with the Lord after our time on this earth is over.

There is no problem with debate over religion. It is natural and necessary. For some reason this country in particular has become afraid of such discussion. Why can't Christians be bold and tell the world of the amazing sacrifice made for us and of the limitless grace and mercy that God has for his children?

Celebrity

I can't say that I'm a huge fan of celebrity culture. Strange as it may seem, in my book people should have done something of note in order to gain fame. And for that matter, fame these days is a very different kettle of fish to the fame of yesteryear - do we really need to know every minute aspect of these people's lives? I suppose it's a result of the instant media world we live in. It's also far too easy for those we admire to become idols. Whatever they might have achieved, no human deserves that kind of adulation and worship. But anyway, as I say I'm not a big celeb fan. Great sportspeople that have excelled in their chosen field? Yep, I'm on board with them being recognised. Film stars and musicians who have genuinely made an artistic impact on the world? All good. My current problem with celebrities lies in their unrivalled capacity to let you down.

I should probably stop writing in the abstract about now and get more specific. Please welcome Ms. Kelly Rowland and Ms. Beyonce Knowles to the debate; two thirds of the super-girl-group Destiny's Child and now solo stars in their own right. During the early 00s I was a huge DC fan, to some extent I still am. They made great pop/R'n'B music and nothing can change that. But that wasn't the only reason that I appreciated the group back then. Their attitude was that of empowered women with integrity. They made it clear that you could be sexy without having sex; that dressing and acting in a classy manner was far more attractive than walking around with half your clothes falling off. They recognised God's hand in their lives and even sang about 'not compromising their Christianity'. Which is why it saddens and even angers me to see their wildly different image and attitudes today.

These days both Rowland and Knowles seem to have no qualms about stripping off in their videos in a far from classy manner. Many of their songs are laden with sexual innuendo and a desire beyond all else, to please their man. I don't want to be judgemental. It's not my place. But it is so dispiriting to see these changes in the women that I looked up to as a teenager.

I'd be interested to know the thoughts of the other Destiny's Child member, Michelle Williams. When the group went their separate ways she went into gospel music and so I hope that she still holds the same values as she did back then. Sadly in the UK there is very little word of the gospel music industry so I'm not sure what she's up to these days.

I suppose it just goes to show that all humans fail. We are all far from perfect and whilst to some extent it is good to have role models, we should beware looking up to those we only know through magazines, TV and CDs. Our role models should be people around us in our day to day lives and of course, ultimately our role model should be Jesus Christ. He'll never let us down.

The James Toseland Appreciation Society

Some people have it all; meet James Toseland.

James is 27 years old and hails from Doncaster. He has twice won the World Superbike Championship and this year made the step up to MotoGP. Easy on the eye, an accomplished pianist and as he revealed on Sport Relief on Friday he can blooming well sing too. Check out his piano skills in the video below. I'm off to work out how I can persuade him to marry me. That is once I've also convinced him that he's a sinner who needs to repent and turn to trust in Jesus Christ...

A crafty little project

My granny like tendencies have raised their ugly heads again this week. However this time it's not moaning about the state of the nation or making that 'this requires a lot of effort' noise when I get up from a chair. It's knitting. The most granny-ish pastime of them all.

Over the years I've attempted many different arts and crafts projects with limited success. Card-making, cross-stitching, jewellery-making and painting little boxes to name but a few. You wouldn't believe the amount of random craft odds and ends that are dotted around the house. My problem is that I'm just not creative enough. If I were a Mr Men character I'd be Little Miss Analytical. It's not in my nature to be creative. I'm all about analysing other peoples' creativity! To put it simply, after a few weeks at a certain craft I hit a brick wall. I just run out of ideas! Solution? I just move on to the next one!

Anyway, the current craft du jour is knitting. However I am hopeful that this one may last a little longer. Firstly because it actually has a purpose behind it and secondly because the creative element stretches only to my deciding which colours to use! I've recently become aware of a charity called Samaritan's Purse. They are a Christian charity that aim to spread the Gospel whilst supplying practical everyday items to victims of war, poverty, natural disasters etc. One of their projects is Operation Christmas Child. Supporters are encouraged to pack a shoe box with toys, stationary, hygiene items (e.g. toothbrushes, soap, hairbrushes) and other nice things for children around the world who need them. One of their ideas is for knitted woolly hats to go in the boxes. Hence, my knitting frenzy. And yes, I know it's a long time until Christmas but I'm not exactly a professional knitter so I thought it would make sense to make a start now!

If you'd like to join my knitting crusade then check out http://www.samaritanspurse.uk.com/occ/knitting_for_occ.asp where you can download patterns in PDF format.

Altogether now..."Knit one, purl one, knit one, purl one..."

My funny Valentine

Valentine's Day tomorrow. Woop-de-doo. Can you tell that I'm single?

To be honest I take issue with the whole thing anyway but I promise that what follows is not some sort of bitter rant! No doubt I could deliver one if I so desired but I think it important that I do not indulge that side of myself!

Valentine's Day is the day when we are all told to be romantic. If we're told to be romantic, doesn't that rather negate the romance? Surely the romance of something is largely in the spontaneity of it? Who feels truly special when their other half buys them flowers or chocolates on Valentine's Day? It would be much better were they to choose some other day to express their love. Romance just isn't the same if it's been instigated by Clinton's Cards.

Of course I speak from vast experience. Ahem.

I'm in that strange position at the moment of not wanting to be in a relationship (too much hassle, demands on my time etc.) but wanting to know that there is one waiting somewhere around the corner for me. I have this recurring nightmare that I'm going to end up in a nursing home at 50 years old because my parents have kicked the bucket and I'm still not well enough to look after myself. A husband would solve that particular worry. From what I can gather, good husbands are pretty thin on the ground these days anyway and my (not self-imposed) stringent criteria aren't going to make finding one any easier.

Firstly, I'm a Christian and and the Bible tells me that I should only be going out with a guy that shares my beliefs. Wow - that pool of potential hubbys just shrunk quickly! Secondly, the chap needs to be able to deal with my illness (a lot easier said that done). Thirdly, somehow I'm going to have to come into contact with him (not easy when I generally travel the same distance from home as a particularly lazy tortoise travels in 24 hours). Once all those criteria are fulfilled we get down to the less important things - personality, sense of humour, the ability to actually get along with me...

Gah. Love, schmove. As a wise woman once said: "Love? I'd rather fall in chocolate."

Tory-graph thieves!

The cheek of it! I open up my newspaper today and what do I find? An article telling me all about the 'there weren't three kings' issue. The Daily Telegraph have evidently been reading my blog! They claim it is written in response to the Archbishop of Canterbury's comments on the subject, so maybe it's Dr Williams who is a Giraffe-a-licious fan! I'll have to see about getting myself invited to the Lambeth conference this year. I'll sort them all out!

We three k.. now let me just stop you there.

I’m sure we all know the carol: “We three kings of orient are…” Although of course your level of maturity will determine whether this is followed by the words “…bearing gifts we travel afar…” or “one in a taxi, one in a car…” Steady yourselves because I’m about to blow a Christmas myth wide open!

THERE. WERE. NOT. THREE. KINGS.

I can feel the shock-waves rippling away from me! I should be on QI! Only the gospel of Matthew mentions the Magi (wise men, not kings) and nowhere does it say that there were three of them. Matthew chapter 2 says:

1 Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men [1] from the east came to Jerusalem, 2 saying, “Where is he who has been born king of the Jews? For we saw his star when it rose [2] and have come to worship him.” 3 When Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him; 4 and assembling all the chief priests and scribes of the people, he inquired of them where the Christ was to be born. 5 They told him, “In Bethlehem of Judea, for so it is written by the prophet:

6 “‘And you, O Bethlehem, in the land of Judah,

are by no means least among the rulers of Judah;

for from you shall come a ruler

who will shepherd my people Israel.’”

7 Then Herod summoned the wise men secretly and ascertained from them what time the star had appeared. 8 And he sent them to Bethlehem, saying, “Go and search diligently for the child, and when you have found him, bring me word, that I too may come and worship him.” 9 After listening to the king, they went on their way. And behold, the star that they had seen when it rose went before them until it came to rest over the place where the child was. 10 When they saw the star, they rejoiced exceedingly with great joy. 11 And going into the house they saw the child with Mary his mother, and they fell down and worshiped him. Then, opening their treasures, they offered him gifts, gold and frankincense and myrrh. 12 And being warned in a dream not to return to Herod, they departed to their own country by another way.

[1] 2:1 Greek magi; also verses 7, 16 [2] 2:2 Or in the east; also verse 9

Wise men? Check. Three gifts? Check. Three wise men? Er….no. That was quite an assumption someone made there wasn’t it?! Anyway my point is, that for me at least, the most exciting part is not the Magi themselves but the gifts that they brought. Although please note that I do still maintain that Christmas is not about the presents! Gold, frankincense and myrrh eh? You might find some gold in your average Marks and Spencer catalogue but I think you’d be hard pushed to find either of the other two. The great thing about these gifts is that they were given to Jesus Christ specifically to point to what his life on earth was going to be about.

Gold – a gift for a king. The King. Not Elvis… ahem. Jesus. The King of the Jews. The Messiah, whom God promised to his people generations ago.

Frankincense – an ingredient in the production of incense. In the Old Testament incense was burnt as a sacrifice to God. It was holy and used when God was to come into the presence of the Israelites. Jesus was both God and man, truly and clearly in the presence of his people.

Myrrh – a fragrant material used not only in incense, but also as an embalming ointment. The gift of myrrh pointed to Christ’s ultimate reason for being born – to die.

Man, that’s just so cool! Well obviously not the fact that he had to die. But the fact that he did. And that these weird presents were saying just that!

Exodus, my foot

I'm a bit slow off the mark with this particular blog. Last Tuesday Channel 4 showed a one-off drama called Exodus. It was an attempt to retell the biblical story of Moses and the Israelites escape from Egypt in a modern setting. I think it would be fair to say that few Christians would expect such a drama to be a stirring, accurate and interesting account of a vital part of the bible. But even given those caveats, Exodus was one of the most frustrating pieces of television I have witnessed.

The concept itself of moving the action into a contemporary setting was both sound and intriguing. So we had a dictator style politician (cunningly named Pharaoh) carrying out a sort of ethnic and class cleansing act, sending all the undesirables to live in Dreamland, an old run down ex-theme park type of place. The baby Moses was seen left on the beach for Pharaoh's wife to find, as his mother attempted to flee the military police. But once the concept was in place and the story began, the production ran into trouble.

Crucially the makers couldn't decide whether to either eschew the religious aspects completely or to keep the (let's face it, pretty vital) role of God in their drama. The result was a sort of airy-fairy spirituality, usually involving Moses hearing a lot of whispering. Rather than a burning bush, on fire yet not consumed, there was a bizarre man-made (and man-burned) giant wooden statue, strangely reminiscent of The Wicker Man! Instead of God and Moses having an amazing conversation in which God reveals his true name and character (Exodus Ch 3), there were simply a few whispered words which it seemed that a dead man was communicating rather than the Living God.

In this case, approaching Pharaoh and asking for the freedom of his people was really Moses's plan. He embarked on some sort of idealistic crusade which turned into sheer vigilantism. In the Bible all of the events are divinely inspired. God is in control at all times. It is he who commands, judges and redeems with perfect justice.

Horrifically in this new adaptation, the people created their own plagues! They launched computer viruses, genetically engineered a plague and put algae in the water to make it red and undrinkable. This is just terrorism. Worst of all, the Passover became a midwife bombing a baby clinic. That just made me feel sick.

The wonder of the Exodus story is in the amazing way that God keeps his promises and foretells the coming of Jesus, the ultimate Passover lamb. God was only mentioned by name 2 hours into the film. In trying to justify the atrocities committed Moses claims, "God told me to do it!" Has he been watching the same thing as I've been watching? Having spent so much for the running time hedging their bets on the God stuff, the makers then have the audacity to blame him for these completely human acts.

Come the end all pretence of remaining true to the Biblical story was abandoned. In a utterly baffling turn of events following Pharaoh's allowing the people to leave, firstly a civil war broke out amongst the 'Israelites' and the 'Egyptians' (in the Bible, the Egyptians give the Israelites all sorts of valuable items for them to take to the Promised Land), Moses briefly became a superhero (he jumped from a multi storey building to the ground without a scratch on him), he alone parted the sea and was then drowned! Utterly absurd. In truth, God led his people out of Egypt (literally, as a pillar of cloud and fire), through the Red Sea (drowning the chasing Pharaoh in judgment) and eventually to Mount Sinai where Moses received God's law.

I haven't even come close to describing the brilliance of the exodus; God so clearly at work and in control, protecting his people and redeeming them from slavery. The makers of Exodus should be ashamed of themselves. Not only was their programme insulting to millions of Bible believing Christians, but it was just bad TV.