A few years ago, I saved Christmas.
Normally that would sound like a misleading headlines, designed to grab a reader in and then impress you with my wit as I try to explain what I really meant. But I do literally mean that. I saved Christmas. Father Christmas, to be exact.
I was on an American road-trip, with my great friend Jamie. We’d begun in the metropolis machine of New York, and had now driven our way across to Tulsa, Oklahoma. It was early December, and starting to get a bit chilly. So one night, Jamie, myself and a few other Tulsinian friends ventured downtown to hear some carol singing. We walked the city, saw the lights, and then came across Father Christmas, along with his wife – named, Mother Christmas, I think. They were the real-deal. Both were delightfully old, and had faces that were warm and inviting. The beard was legitimate, the wrinkles were real, and their smiles and rich Southern accents oozed authenticity. We chatted to them both, shared our Christmas wish-lists, and then moved on to get hot chocolate. We wandered. And ten, as we went back to our rental car to head off – we saw an unusual site.
Father Christmas, trying to break into the car next to us.
At first, we were flummoxed. Wasn’t Santa meant to travel by sleigh? And wasn’t he meant to give gifts – not steal them? But a quick conversation later, and we realised the problem. Mother Christmas had been getting too cold, so had taken one of their cars home. Only – she had both sets of keys in her jacket – leaving Santa short of a ride.
He didn’t know what to do – and was about to ask the police if they could assist him in breaking in. We had a better idea – and offered to take him home. He jumped in the car, we put on appropriate Christmas carols – and had a delightful 20 minutes of taking Father Christmas home – knowing that we had done the world a favour.
Now, the more astute reader will note – that we were in all likelihood not carrying the real Father Christmas at all. Instead, we were carrying an ordinary man, who had lived in Tulsa his whole life.
And with them – I’d agree. Apart from one little word – ‘ordinary.’
You see, according to the story of Christmas, there’s a husband and wife who live a mystical life in the North Pole. They oversee a team of elves, who create toys – which Santa and his magical reindeer deliver across the globe on Christmas Eve.
According to the story of scientism – the belief that science is the only way of knowing – the person sitting in the car with us was a mixture of organic chemicals and compounds. His life was determined entirely by his environment and the way these factors drove his decision making.
And according to the story of the Hebrew and Christian scriptures – this man is one who bears the thumbprint of the divine on every aspect of his life. This is one who is no mere mortal, but is crowned and charged with possibility and mystery in their very being.
This is one thing I love about a worldview that transcends scientism, or materialistic determinism – it makes your world that much bigger. You see, pure scientism – think Richard Dawkin’s atheism – says that what-you-see-is-what-you-get. There is no room for magic, for mystery or for miracle. It is all science and can all be empirically proven.
In all of human history – there cannot be one miracle. Not one moment of enchantment. Not one sense of spiritual mystery. If there was – even just one little answered prayer – the entire scientism castle would come crashing down.
As G. K. Chesterton quipped:
“If the cosmos of the materialist is the real cosmos, it is not much of a cosmos. The real thing has shrunk. The whole of life is something much more grey, narrow, and trivial than many separate aspects of it. The parts seem greater than the whole.”
Far from being small-minded – the Christian worldview offers a perspective that includes science – but goes wider than it. It acknowledges that science is a fantastic way of knowing – but it does not tell the whole picture.
It enjoys scientific discovery, and seeking to explore the order behind everything we see. And yet, it is open to those rules being broken and transcended – because it recognises that there is Someone bigger than science.
Thus we can have a neurosurgeon praying for his patient. The perfect marriage of scientific rigour and training, along with a recognition that perhaps there is another helper in the room. We can have philosophers who believe in miracles. We can have theologians who apply methods of science to their study of God – and then worship with heart-felt abandon at the one they enjoy.
This is the joy of life. C.S. Lewis also noted that believing in miracles doesn’t mean disbelieving in science. Instead – we have to know the rules of the world, for a miracle to happen. It’s the playful breaking of the rules that makes a miracle – not an ignorance of them.
We know that water doesn’t turn into wine. That’s what makes it so delightfully good when it does.
We know that sickness is fought by an immune system, and can be supported by medicine. That’s what makes it so delightfully great when a miraculous healing occurs. Blind people don’t suddenly see. We don’t get insights into what’s going to happen. We can’t scientifically discover what latent dreams lie on a person’s heart.
We know this – and yet, we see it happen. This is the delight of mystery, and the beauty of the world. And we need a story of everything that includes this mystery and delight. So maybe I didn’t save Santa. Maybe I didn’t save Christmas. But I did enjoy time with one who is made in the image of God, and one who contains more mystery and worth than science would ever allow.
And, who knows? As the book of Hebrews says, “Do not forget to show hospitality to strangers, for by so doing some people have shown hospitality to angels without knowing it.” Angels in your workplace? Amongst the poor? On the side of the road, needing a ride?
That sounds more real to me, more than anything a scientism can tell.
Here’s to mystery, the unknown and a life of faith and adventure – discovering as we follow.
HAPPY CHRISTMAS!
Jeremy Suisted is an Innovation Consultant, as well as a part-time Old Testament lecturer, copywriter and speaker. He is a New Zealander who blogs at www.jeremysuisted.com, where this article was first published.
A few weeks ago I was back in Canada, where I lived from 2010-2016 — and I always enjoy opportunities to go back and speak in the country that was home for six years.
When we were in Canada I also took part in a mission at Ottawa University, in Canada’s capital city. It’s always exciting to do university missions in Canada because when I was there (2010-2016), I helped to start them off. To see them now, thriving and having a life of their own is so exciting.
DB: So the book is trying to bridge the gap between the subjective and the objective, the theological and the personal. I think the question of human sexuality and desire is a profound one to our personhood, in our bodies and in the world. It really requires a different approach than just a statement of belief, it’s something which requires an incarnational, as much as a scriptural response. My book doesn’t say “here’s what scripture says – now go live it”, it says, “here’s what scripture says, this is how I as a human being have lived it.” I think that is so important for gay people that this question doesn’t remain abstract but comes down and dwells with them and relates to them. That’s what I needed when I was going through my own questioning. So I want the book to make people feel that they have ‘company’ and draw them towards intimacy with God. At the very centre of the book is the question, “have you experienced the love of God?”. I really don’t think that the question of who we are, including our sexuality is really answerable until we have experienced the love of God in Jesus. I don’t think you can understand the Christian ethic without knowing Christ. So I wrote this primarily as an invitation to embrace the love of God.
He tried to use mockery, putting up a couple of Bible verses as if they were self-evidently ridiculous. It’s hard to deal with those in a short space of time – but it can be done! (although I am not sure I did it well).
Andrew Roycroft
At its heart, Exploring the God Question has three DVDs, covering the three broad topics of ‘The Cosmos’, ‘Life and Evolution’ and ‘Mind and Consciousness’. Each topic is split into two roughly 30 minute programmes, and each programme is divided into between six and nine sections, all of which can be individually played from the main DVD menu. This allows the DVDs to be used to provide stand-alone 30-minute or one-hour presentations on a topic, or each section can be used as short discussion starters. The overall format is made up of segments of interviews linked by a narrator and interspersed with impressive visuals.
Equally impressive as the line-up of interviewees is the scope of topics covered, and the willingness to take 
The ‘Mind and Consciousness’ DVD covers material which is becoming increasingly relevant, with the rise of Artificial Intelligence and allied questions about the nature of humanity. Nineteenth century concerns about Darwinism may have centred on the reduction of humanity to being no more than a the animal kingdom, but in the twenty-first century the issue is whether we are no more than very complex biological machines. If materialism is true then this is certainly the case. However, this brings in its wake a number of consequences, the most important of which are that free will is an illusion, and that morality is a social construction and no moral absolutes exist. The DVD deals with the question of morality, but also covers near death experiences, religious experience, and the nature of consciousness.
The DVD which dealt with material closest to my own area of expertise was ‘The Cosmos’, which covers the creation of the universe and the Big Bang, the elegance of the laws of physics, and various aspects of the ‘fine tuning’ of the universe. These are well covered, and to me show the difference between atheism and theism at its most stark. For the theist ‘the heavens declare the glory of God’ (Psalm 19). For the atheist ‘it’s really just chance’ (Steven Weinberg, Nobel Prize for Physics, 1979). Using the polite discourse of the academy I would say I find Weinberg’s view ‘deeply unsatisfying’. Using the somewhat more direct level of discourse of my local coffee shop I would say that if you are asking me to believe that the whole physical universe, its laws and allied complexity, came into existence out of nothing and ‘it’s really just chance’, then sorry, I just don’t have enough ‘faith’ to be an atheist.
Dundee’s Central Baptist Church played host to around three hundred folks on November 3rd, who gathered to consider how to share the gospel in our age of tough questions, at this year’s Solas Conference. They came from all over Scotland, the North of England (and one from Wales!) to explore “Confident Christianity”.
Rev Jim Turrent, commented: “The reason we hosted this conference is that we think it is a really good thing to do and we think that Dundee is a really good place to do it. We’re excited about the quality of the speakers, and the equipping of the church both here in Dundee, and across Scotland, and the speakers that we have had, have not disappointed – they have been absolutely excellent. What we are hoping and praying is, that the fruit of this conference will be more Confident Christianity and more confident Christians, because they are the key to the re-evangelisation of Scotland, and The North.”
