Month: October 2007

In our culture, the question of masculinity has sadly been deemed irrelevant. It no longer matters. Maybe in the days of the knights it might have mattered, but today, it doesn’t. It is a shame our culture has come to that. How indeed can we raise up young men if they no longer know what it means to be a man.

Of course, we have a number of misconceptions. Now some of these misconceptions might have a grain of truth to them, but that is indeed what makes them so deadly. For instance, I think part of what makes a man a man is how he responds sexually to a lady. However, we’ve taken that to a deadly extreme when we measure masculinity by how many women a man can sleep with.

I do believe that a man is supposed to be strong in the soul, but we take that to an extent that it should not be taken to when we say that the measure of a man is how much he can bench press. It makes me wonder about a guy like myself who frequently in my old work position had to page for help to lift heavy objects. (Having a steel rod on one’s spine doesn’t help!)

It seems in our culture, men are the ones who are supposed to drink beer all the time, watch sports, and drive cars really fast. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with any of those in themselves. (Although you should drive the speed limit, but you should enjoy driving I think) However, the problem I see is that we make such secondary characteristics the measure of men.

And this has had an effect in our culture. Look at most TV shows. We have gone from “Father Knows Best” to “Father is a big idiot who only thinks about sex.” If anything, it is the women who are the sane ones and just have to keep the hormones of their husbands under control. This is one reason I loved Jonathan Kent’s character on Smallville. He was a positive father figure when many others were lacking.

A lot of this has been on my mind due to a thread in a forum I belong to talking about the Boy Scouts and homosexuality. Why do I agree with them? It’s not just because the Boy Scouts agree with Scripture in this, but because I think homosexuality is harmful to men. I do think that part of being a man is responding to a lady properly and a man properly.

I believe a man should enjoy masculinity, but it should be his own. He should delight in the fact that he’s male. I think he can enjoy other men provided it’s simply delighting in being men. Men can have deep love relationships with each other, but those are not strengthened when they are sexualized. Masculinity is to be exalted in, but you must realize you have it on your own. Femininity is that outside of you which complements you.

Men need men in their lives though to be models and to call them to account. The first main figure should be the father. Unfortunately, many of our fathers in today’s world are absent. They are often married and cheating on their spouse with another lover called a job. (Sadly, this can especially happen in ministry.) It has been one vow of mine that whenever I become a father, that I will set aside time for my children and be a part of their lives.

There will naturally be other men. Such men could be teachers and coaches or men of respect in the church. You might find men at a distance such as a sports star. It’s important though to note that everyone will have role models and we should be sure we have good ones and not bad ones.

As for the topic of sex and women, a real man will treat a lady like a lady. Even if such a man is planning to remain celibate or is a virgin, he will treat a lady like a lady. Unfortunately, too many of our men are young boys with adult bodies who see women as playthings for their own pleasure.

Doesn’t it break my heart to see unmarried men and women buying condoms? Yes. We all need protection for the ultimate act of trust and love between two people.  Honestly, part of me wants to cry every time I see it.

Let’s be clear about something men! There’s also nothing unmasculine about crying! How do I know this? Simple. The Bible tells me “Jesus Wept.” Does anyone want to stand up and say Jesus Christ was not a real man? Jesus Christ was the most masculine man of all and is the ultimate role model of what a man is to be like.

Oh Lord! We need men! We need real men who will stand up and lead for if the men of today fall, I do not know if we have another generation of men coming up behind them.

I’ve been thinking some lately about various issues. One of them has been the topic of masculinity today. What does it mean today for me or any other male to be a man? This has been on my mind lately with joining a Y and working out and with seeing a remark on the Boy Scouts and homosexuality.

But before I can get to that issue, I find it important to discuss Christ first who is the archetype for what a man is to be. It is the Christian teaching that Jesus is the Son and not the Daughter. There are some passages where we can make a “sex-friendly” translation and have children of God instead of sons of God and “Blessed is the one” instead of “blessed is the man” and we will not lose out.

I think though that there are specific reasons that the incarnate God took on masculinity.

To begin with, systems have been generally patriarchal in many cases and I don’t think this is an accident. I do believe that men were meant to be the leaders. I do not consider this sexist or an insult to women. I just think that men have generally had the qualities that better prepare them for leadership.

Consider that even our macho attitude might have some ideas right. Now when I’m at the gym, I’m hardly a muscular guy. Lifting 20 pound weights is enough for me. Yet even if our macho attitude says your masculinity is determined by how much you can bench press, could there be a grain of truth in the error?

Could it be that instead, the focusing on strength in the man does point out that a man is supposed to be strong? Not necessarily in the body, but in the soul. He is to be a rock that the world can depend on. He is to be a force for good that is to change the world. He is to stand up and lead his family before God.

I believe that this could be the heart of the truth and we deeply damage manhood today when we make it purely physical. You could be able to in the Iron Man competition and not be truly masculine. We do the same with women when we judge their femininity based on their figure. (Could it be their figure actually represents life?)

I find it interesting when I think about this that God when he came down actually could we say have some control over the body he’d have, but yet, Jesus is a non-descript person in appearance, at least according to Isaiah 53. There’s nothing in his appearance that screams that he is the king of the Jews.  Yet Jesus is the manliest man of all time.

Jesus then came to be our king. He is our leader. He is the one we are to bow down to and this fits with our patriarchal roles. I do not believe this is an accident. I believe it is simply nature. I believe this is also why God chooses for us to address him as Father. While I believe masculinity and femininity both reside in God, the leadership and ruling language is fitting of the masculine side.

However, there is also the role of salvation. When does a lady give birth? When she has life put into her. That life doesn’t come into her from herself though or even from another lady. She has to get it from a man. It is only when a man sends his life into the woman that new life is capable of being born.

In Scripture, we are seen as the bride of Christ. What does that mean? It means Christ comes to us and he plants his life into us. We cannot bring about the physical life in ourselves. We cannot do so with the spiritual either. It is only with Jesus as the Son that we have this symbolism taking place.

Now some might say men have an unfair advantage in that we have a role model for Christ while there isn’t one for femininity. I would say there could be though. It could be the ones that Christ loved the most. Look at the way the church is described. That is the way a wife is to be. I do not mean the negative actions in Scripture though, but Christ describing why he loves her and what he will do for her and what she is to do for him. In fact, it could be said in thinking about it that the epistles teach us all of this.

Thus, before discussing masculinity, I have to conclude, Christ is the Son of God. It is for a purpose. If some wish to see me as sexist, let them. I instead will rest realizing that I am doing what I can to honor both masculinity and femininity.

I was listening to the internet radio program I was on with my roommate and we were on the part where a caller called in talking about the Christian view of homosexuality. Now my first stance on this is that while I agree it’s sinful, this is not the central claim of Christianity. The central claim is that Jesus rose from the dead. Thus, the way you disprove Christianity is to deal with that. All other issues are secondary.

However, the caller was talking to the other guy who had called in for the program and was telling him that he had several homosexual friends (He said gay actually, but I say homosexual due to my stance that I won’t let proper terminology be changed in a euphemistic sort of way.) who were just as happy and several kids not raised in traditional homes that were just as happy.

Here’s the problem. The problem is the word “happy.”

Now, maybe he meant what I’m talking about. We can’t know for sure without talking to him again sometime. However, we make a mistake if we think that in the view most people take the word to mean, that the goal is to raise up children so that they will be happy.

Think of some kids. Think of Dudley from the Harry Potter series. Think of Veruca Salt from Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Think of that spoiled brat you see every time you go to the department store. Think of that snotty rich kid that you see at the mall who has everything he wants.

Are they happy? Could very well be! They have parents willing to bend Heaven and Earth just to make sure their children don’t suffer any in life.

Do you want any of them as your kids? (Other than to set them straight, I doubt it.)

So what’s the mistake then? Shouldn’t we all want children to be happy?

Indeed, we should. We should all want to be happy ourselves. Happiness to the ancients though had another dimension that we have lacked. That dimension is the dimension of virtue. To the ancient mindset, the good life consisted in, well, being good. It is quite a reversal. Today, we see morality as a hindrance to happiness. They saw it as a key to happiness.

So what kind of children are to be raised? Children with self-control. Children with wisdom and courage. Children that seek the betterment of the world around them. Truly if children have such, they will be capable of enjoying themselves and being happier in more situations than the Veruca Salts of the world will.

So what is to be said? Sure. Kids can be happy. That’s not the goal. The goal is, are they capable and functioning and well-contributing members of society? Frankly, looking at today’s kids, I’m quite concerned about that. I hope and pray when I start to have some that I will raise them in the right way and why not do so the Proverbial way, with the Fear of the Lord?

Maybe the good book can tell us how to live the good life after all.

I’ve been thinking about something a lot lately. Ever since I moved here, I’ve had to live life in a whole new way as I have a roommate now. (Dude. You are truly an awesome guy.) As I write this, I almost feel emotional as I think about how much I am blessed in my life and as I thought about what to write tonight I could only think “Thank God for friends.”

I don’t know if others have noticed it, but I believe I have changed here in huge ways and done things that I would never do before because I am out with a good friend of mine. I always know that whenever we go anywhere together, my friend has my back, and I have his of course. I can only speak from my perspective though.

Tonight, I worked late and because of that, I had to miss Smallville. That’s killer in my world. Now, my roommate couldn’t get my DVD-recorder working but something else matters more. He offered to try. I thought that was awesome. I didn’t have good news when I got home, but I know he was willing. (Which, if anyone can stream that to me, let me know.)

There is just something nice about coming home at the end of the day and being able to forget about everything because I have a friend here. We’ve spent much time going through an old Super Nintendo game together called Secret of Mana. It’s been years, but it’s totally different with a good friend. If I’m playing Paper Mario, he enjoys coming in and watching.

This isn’t just about my roommate though. That’s just the first example. This is about all my other friends also. When I was on an internet radio program recently, I had a critic making some disparaging remarks to me while I was speaking on the air and away from  the computer. I had no doubt that my friends were there and letting him have it. One of them has said that if he comes to the forum I debate on, she’s going to let him have it.

Okay. A sick side of me looks forward to it.

Those friends have been there several times. Each of them knows well how they have. I couldn’t make it without them. I told a friend recently that there’s one thing I’ve learned from RPGs. I could be the best apologist in the world and able to answer any question, but I would not be able to do so without my friends behind me. They make all the difference.

Thank God for friends indeed. Each and every night I pray, they are the first people that I think of. I pray God blesses them as much as they have been a blessing to me.

The following is a saying of C.S. Lewis. Lewis could understand the reason why students would be hesitant to read Plato though. They thought that the old sage himself might be beyond them so they needed to approach him through someone more easy to understand. However, Lewis pointed out that students who actually read Plato find that isn’t the case.

Indeed, I found this to be the case as well as I followed Lewis’s maxim. I decided just last year even that instead of simply reading about Plato, I would read Plato. I ordered his complete works and read right through them! Fascinating! So fascinating that in some spare time, I’m even reading through them again.

It has been a great joy also to hear that some people have taken my advice to read him as well and picked up some of his dialogues. My own roommate, a really awesome guy and friend of course who I’m blessed to have in my life, went and ordered the complete works as well. There is great joy in that.

I also went that same time and ordered the basic works of Aristotle. (Before some of you start wondering about basic works, I ask you to do an Amazon search and just find out how much is included in the basic works.) Now, I’m definitely more of a Platonist than an Aristotlean, but I did find it helpful and I can say that I have read them.

This same year, I took it upon myself to read the Qu’ran. That wasn’t necessarily an easy task, but I did it. While at the bookstore today, I found at a good price several other works that are major in the area of religion such as the Bhagavad-Gita, a copy without commentary unlike what I have, and the Analects. (I also picked up several Greek plays.)

After discussions on historical figures, I went as well and read historical works. Which ones? Authors like Plutarch and Tacitus. I have Josephus here who I have yet to go straight through yet. However, my stance has been the same. I would prefer to read the books instead of books about the books.

Don’t get me wrong entirely. I have nothing against reading books about Plato any more than I have reading books about Scripture. My contention is simply that you also need to go and read the main sources if possible. (Naturally, with some ancient works, that can’t be done.) Do you want to know what a church father said about a topic for instance? Read that church father. Wanna know what the Talmud says about Jesus? Read the Talmud!

Why am I putting this here? Because wise reading should be something for all of us and we Christians need to be wise in the literature and thought of the world. Not just in theology, but in every area.

Follow the maxim of Lewis then. Read Plato, Not books about Plato.

I talked some yesterday about books and doing research. This plea of mine is to several young Christian apologists I know. Sadly, it probably applies to several people who have been in the faith for years, though maybe not in the area of Christian apologetics. It is a criticism I have of many that I think needs to be dealt with.

Too many of them read a lot of books, which I am not against, but they have not read THE BOOK.

Friends. We all need to get Scripture under our belts and I would that before you read any other book on Scripture, that you would read Scripture. In fact, after you read the Scripture through, I would suggest you do something else. You start reading it through again. Of course at that time, I recommend other books. It has been said that a man of the book will be a man of many books.

The first time I finished the book, I was in 7th grade. I know at one point in High School I had read it through four times. Now I’ve lost count. It’s probably around a dozen now. My life is all the better for it. No one can present me with a verse or a story in an argument that I haven’t seen.

And of course, this puts Scripture on my memory many times. I can usually have a verse or a passage in mind for any situation. The more you read Scripture, the more you will be able to recall it to your memory. The more it will become part of your being and you will know it like you know the back of your hand.

Indeed, we should all be like this. Too often, I even approach it as just another book. Oh friends! Pray that I restore my passion as well, but mark my words! If you have not read the book, do yourself a favor and do so. It is God’s gift to you. Embrace it!

Last Thursday night, I was involved in an internet radio program. The program had a chat room option and in the chat was a girl arguing for the Christ myth. (If you come here, you know who you are.) When told that Josephus mentions Jesus, she pointed out that Josephus also mentions Hercules. (For readers who don’t know, Josephus was a Jewish historian in the last first century A.D.)

The article linked to was right here so all can see that this is a real article:

http://exchristian.net/exchristian/2003/04/is-christianity-based-on-pagan-roots.php

All who are concerned about the copycat theory, I recommend going to Tektonics as JPHolding deals the death blow to that several times as does Glenn Miller of Christian-thinktank.com. However, notice this part about Josephus:

Likewise the ‘evidence’ of Hercules closely parallels that of Jesus. We have historical people like Hesiod and Plato who mentions Hercules. Similar to the way the gospels tell a narrative story of Jesus, so do we have the epic stories of Homer who depict the life of Hercules. Aesop tells stories and quotes the words of Hercules. Just as we have mention of Jesus in Josephus’ Antiquities, so Josephus mentions Hercules in his ‘Antiquities’ (see 1.15, 8.5.3, 10.11.1). Just as Tacitus mentions a Crestus, he also mentions Hercules many times in his Annals. And most importantly, just as we have no artifacts, writings or eyewitnesses about Hercules, we also have nothing about Jesus. All information about Hercules and Jesus comes from stories, beliefs, and hearsay. Should we then believe in a historical Hercules, simply because ancient historians mention him and that we have stories and beliefs about him?

Now, there are several others mentioned, but since Josephus was the one talked about, she used him. What I did was ask her if she had her copy of Josephus with her. She seemed shocked. Why have such a thing?  However, I had mine, and while I was chatting, I did turn and look at each of the references.

And I found nothing in them indicating that Josephus saw Hercules as a historical figure. I see that with Christ however. (Jesus, the brother of James for instance. James is a historical figure and thus, it’s reasonable to think his brother would be as well.)

Folks. This is important to note. This took five minutes of my time. Just five minutes. However, this girl hadn’t even checked up on the reference and what could be one reason for missing eternity. I find that incredibly sad. There are some arguments that are harder to answer. We all know this in this field. They’re not unanswerable of course, but they won’t be found by five minutes of research. This was not one of them.

Friends. Be willing to look up something if you have to to make sure the claim is the truth. If a skeptic tells you something, it is no embarrassment to say “Let me go to my library and look it up.” Remember, that five minutes could help demolish an argument that someone has been using to keep away from Christianity.

And it will strengthen your faith as well.

Yeah. That took five minutes. However, be ready always. Be studying and learning whatever you can. I could give more advice on book recommendations as blogs go on.

In this field, one meets many non-Christians who seem to have their own parameters set for God. If God will deal with the problem of evil in my life, then I will come to him. If God will bring me happiness, I will come. If God will help me find the person I will marry, I will come. If God will do X, I will come.

This isn’t anything new. We find it throughout Scripture. The Israelites complain that God is not doing what they want him to do. Rather than approach their God as they should, they choose to have Aaron make an idol for them so they can approach god on their own terms.

Several years later, the lesson still hasn’t been learned. When we see Christ on the cross, the chief priests are there mocking. “Let him come down from the cross if he truly is the Messiah so we may see and believe!” One wonders if he had come down if they would have believed or if they would have said it was a devil at work again and blamed it on something like witchcraft.

The sadness is if a man will not believe the truth after all, he is forced to believe anything else.

Let us be careful lest we make the same mistake in approaching the Almighty. When you come to God, you cannot come and tell him what you desire of him. Instead, you come to God so he may tell you what he desires of you. He has already done such in fact. He desires you entirely. Not just part of you. Not just most of you. Not just 99.9% of you. He desires all of you.

God is the one who sets all the rules for the relationship. He did this with the law. Other nations might have been able to choose how they would approach their gods. Not Israel. Israel was given a distinct way to approach God and that way did not change for them. Why? Because the God they were approaching did not change. Whether they were in the wilderness, in Israel, or in captivity, Israel was to approach God the same way.

Today, we approach through the fulfillment of that law, the Christ. It does no good to ask God to provide another way. He has none and will provide none. If you will not approach him on the terms that he has set, then you will not approach him at all. You are in no place to make demands of him.

Were God to change his essential nature for you, then he would be bowing to you and calling you God. What change would you have him make anyway? A change for the better? Then he was not the most perfect being to begin with. A change for the lesser? Then you wish him to be less than perfect. Either way, you will not get the God of Scripture. You will get a god of your own imagination and that is the only place he will exist.

This is something we must accept. We all have a hard time understanding God. Most all of us have had times when we have been angry with him. We want to know what he is doing in our lives. As I write this, my roommate and I both are suffering from some sickness. (Apparently, I was generous in a way I did not desire.) There are times I have woken up from this in the night and wondered why this was happening.

Yet it is. I must accept that. I cannot tell God he must deal with things my way. I do believe he has given us prayer in that we can make our requests and there is a chance he could do things the way we desire at times, but if he does not, then we must accept that. We must accept that he in his infinite wisdom and knowledge has chosen that which is best.

And this is why I believe many skeptics do not come to God. They want to find him on their terms. Unfortunately, God is the only one in town. There is no other place to turn to. You can search high and low for another god. It does not exist. You will merely have to make something else to be that god. It could be power, money, sex, or the most common one I think, yourself.

Yet those of us who do accept him as he is do get the blessing. He does the same for us. He accepts us as we are on his terms. We are taken into his family on his terms. We may seek to change Christianity. We can do no such thing. This is his system. It is not ours. We can no more change it than we can make a new primary color.

Ultimately though, if one seeks the truth, they will find it. It does not mean seeking what you like, as the truth is often not liked. It means seeking that which is true. When we come to this God we may not like everything about at the time, we will come to realize in time that that which we thought most unfit about him is that which is most glorious in his nature.

We do the same in our relationships. We all have friends who have things about them that we don’t like. It does not stop us from being their friends. Husbands and wives have things about each other that drive them crazy. It does not stop them from loving them. This is the question we must then ask of the God of Scripture.

Is he the true God? If he is, then we are to come rather we like him or not. If he has truly raised Jesus from the dead, then there can be no other objections. We may not understand why he allows evil, but we must accept it. We may not like the doctrine of Hell, but we must accept it.

Unless, of course, we care nothing for truth. If that is the case, then the skeptic can rest assured. If he wants to live his life apart from truth, God will honor that request as well.

The choice is his and yours and mine.

If we are to realize the Kingdom of God on Earth, then it must be by doing our part to make Earth as Heavenly as possible. I do not believe Christ intended for us to do this by taking the law and then using the law to make people righteous, although I do have no objections to Christians in politics. I believe he intended to do this through simple means, and that is people like you and I.

Consider first off that Heaven can be a reality here if we will but let it. The reason we do not have heavenly goods is that we are still being too stingy with earthly goods. Consider C.S. Lewis’s example of the boy who loves chocolate and is told the sexual act is the highest bodily pleasure possible and asks “Does it involve chocolate?” and is told “no.”

The little boy cannot think of how it can be good with the exclusion of chocolate. However, the lovers caught up do not think about chocolate because what they have to think about is so much better. This is not denying the goodness of chocolate of course, but simply realizing a hierarchy. You will not get greater goods while you are still focused on lesser ones.

We do not want the good of Heaven often because we are so stingy with our own deity. We do not want the glory of God for too often, we focus on the glory of ourselves. Consider though some realities of Heaven. I see no reason to think that we will know the future entirely in Heaven. It will be unknown.

However, is that not the case here? Do we not have an unknown future here? Indeed we do. Yet here, we worry about it. Do we do so in Heaven? I see no reason to think so. What makes the difference? Well, there we have God. But we have God here! The difference then is that we are so caught up in God then that we do not have any need to worry. Here, we are focused on ourselves and we worry about the future and usually with a focus on ourselves. There, we are focused on him and the future is not a worry.

What of the past? Here, we have shame for our past sins. We have memories we want to recover from. Will we be ignorant of the past in Heaven? I do not see any reason again to think such. Instead, it could be that that which we consider shameful will be turned to glory.

Consider the case of a man who enters a fight on the street to rescue a young lady from some thugs. Let us suppose that he wins, but it is not without damage. He has several bruises to show for it. Now normally, a bruise could be a cause of shame. However, these could be honor. Each time someone asks “What happened to you?” he can get to tell them the story.

In a similar way, some readers I’m sure know that I have scoleosis. Because of that, I had a steel rod put on my spine before I turned sixteen. My back does have the remains of a scar now. (I cannot tell for sure, for it is hard for me to see my own back even in a mirror. The rod restricts my turning ability.) However, it is now an honor. If people see it, it gives me a chance to tell a story.

I suspect our scars in Heaven could be similar. The sins will be reminders of God’s grace and mercy on us and that will remind us of his glory. The memories we want to forget will be ones we gladly share for they will tell of his compassion with us. Heaven will be a place of victory stories with God being the victor each time.

Again, what keeps us from this? Our self-focus most often. We are too stingy with our control over our universe to let God control it. We are so used to wanting everything our way on our terms that we do not realize that we are to do things his way on his terms. All attempts to bring Heaven on Earth apart from the way he’s recommended actually lead to Hell on Earth.

And what then will be the best way to begin this process? We begin by loving our Lord with all our hearts, souls, minds, and strengths. We then turn and love our neighbor as ourselves. It is a simple method, but sometimes it is the simplest steps that get left out in our day-to-day lives.

It has often been asked why God doesn’t make his existence obvious. (I think he has really.) Along those same lines, I have been asked before why Jesus didn’t appear to skeptics if he truly rose from the dead. Now I can agree that he appeared to at least two, his brother James and to the apostle Paul. Why didn’t he go to the priests and Pharisees though?

In John 14:22, Jesus’s disciple Judas (Not Iscariot) asks him, “Lord. Why do you intend to show yourself to us and not to the world?”

Why indeed?

Yet as I read the text following, I see it talking about the relationship of Jesus to his followers. This is where we get the great text of “I am the vine and you are the branches.”  We are taught in here that our whole is to be in Christ. We will bear fruit only if we do abide in him.

What has that to do with anything?

Could that not be the answer though?

What kind of people is God wanting? Is God wanting people that will come to him only because they think they have to? Or is he looking for people that come who have been seeking the kingdom of God. It is then that we realize the great truth about this. While we may have been the lost sheep looking for the shepherd, it was really he who was looking for us.

And what is the kingdom of God? I believe it’s to consist of the devotion of the followers of Christ to him. It is to be the reign of YHWH on Earth as it is in Heaven. What is this supposed to look like?

It looks like what Jesus told Judas.

It is we being the branches and showing Christ to the world. It is we being his body. It is we continuing the work that he began among us of making the kingdom a reality. It is everyday learning to love God with all our hearts, souls, minds, and strengths, and then to love our neighbor as ourselves. It is learning to live everyday in the paradigm that Christ is the Lord of all creation.

And what happens then?

Christ becomes visible to the people through us.

This is how the early church spread in fact. It was the differences in the lives of the followers of Christ. Of course, they had strong evidences as well, but what made the church appealing was the life that they lived.

This then, is why I do not believe Christ would make an appearance to his opponents after the resurrection.

We are to show the reality to the opponents of Christ that he is alive in our lives today. We are to live lives fully dependent on him. In doing so, we show people the kingdom of God. When we show that Christ rules our lives, then people should be able to see Christ in us and come to him.

In this case, the supposed hiddenness of God is a great gift. He allows us to participate in the plan of redemption for mankind. Christ could have seen angels all around the world to proclaim the good news, but he didn’t. He chose ordinary men.

And who are we to question him?