I woke up early this morning. I was to accompany my grandfather to his hometown in Pampanga. At eighty plus years old, he is still up and about. He is never idle and might get sick of inactivity. But as the years slowly pass by, I realize that he has few years left remaining in his life.

He could still manage to go travel alone. But still, I egged on my mom that I should go with him. Even if he is still agile, perhaps even more than people a decade younger than he is, I still fear that he should not be left alone traveling that far a distance.

Our first stop was at Bacolor, my grandfather’s hometown. This was the town mostly damaged by lahar during the onslaught of Mt. Pinatubo’s eruption in the 1990s. It’s not as deserted as it has been the last time we saw the place. Some road improvements have been made. New stalls, although still empty, have been developed for the town market. What used to be the upper floor of the old houses is now paved to ground. We never saw any of his relatives, except for some people who knew him long ago. I guess we just went there so he could see the place where he spent his childhood years. We saw the trade school where he studied. As we passed a town statue, he proudly told me that it was his grandfather, a previous mayor of the town. Here I also learned a little bit of history, that Bacolor was previously the capital of Pampanga.

It took us only a few minutes stay, and off we went to see his kuya (older brother) at Angeles City. During our jeepney ride, we both noticed all the changes that have happened in the places we passed by. He used to bring me along to Pampanga when I was still a child, more than two decades ago, driving his yellow Beetle.

When he saw his kuya, there was no much fuss about their greeting. But I am very sure that they are both happy even just to see each other. Both are now bachelors again. His kuya told me that he is now eighty six years old, as he reads the morning paper sans eyeglasses on. They had nothing much to say to each other. Sometimes, the silence is even deafening. But I guess when you’ve reached an age as they have been, and when you’ve been with each other growing up, you don’t need much talk to convey what you feel for one another.

During the short few hours we’ve been there, there are some few things that impressed upon me.

I learned about the hardship my grandfather and his brother have been through. They grew up without a father. My grandfather was still inside his pregnant mother and his brother was just a year old when their father died. It was because of that void that my grandpa wanted that his children would never miss a father's love.

He recalls how, as children, they were raised by their grandmother. I think he mentioned that many times. Perhaps when you reach his age, you either repeat things a lot unconsciously, or you want to put emphasis on some things that are very important to you.

It makes me glad that I accompanied my grandpa. I realize that it gives him a little extra strength to visit his hometown, and to see his brother again. On the other hand, I also feel a bit sad when I try to analyze this trip. There would be not much left for these kinds of visit in the future. Sooner or later, each one of them would not be able to travel. If God would forbid, this could be the last time the brothers may see each other, or the last time my grandpa would ever have a look at his hometown.

It must be important to once in a while, go back to your roots. Visit your kinsmen, and pay respect to your elders. I might pay a visit to Abra one day soon.

“He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how” - Friedrich Nietzsche

Someone asked me why I think so much of such things concerning my belief. Why not? I myself was surprised to be asked such a question. Why wouldn’t we think of things that matter to our future, even if we might consider it beyond our knowledge? Should we go on living life as if we are just passing by? If that is so, then we are no different from a headless chicken running around without any direction, without any goal.

Isn’t it a dreadful idea to think that we do not have any purpose or meaning at all? Why, even those who don’t believe in God or a creator have sets of ideas, theories or philosophies, and what-have-yous. And to me, however one might put it, that in itself is also a belief.

Neurologist and Psychiatrist Viktor Frankl, a holocaust survivor, attempted to find meaning in life while he was in a Nazi concentration camp. He developed the term logotheraphy or “will to meaning” which states some basic principles that life has a meaning, even the most miserable ones, that our motivation to live is to find a meaning in our life, and that we have freedom to find that meaning in whatever circumstances we are in.

“It did not really matter what we expected from life, but rather what life expected from us. We needed to stop asking about the meaning of life, and instead to think of ourselves as those who were being questioned by life—daily and hourly. Our answer must consist, not in talk and meditation, but in right action and in right conduct. Life ultimately means taking the responsibility to find the right answer to its problems and to fulfill the tasks which it constantly sets for each individual.”

What then is the meaning of life? This has been one of the most frequently asked question, which developed different approach and variations. For Frankl, to have a meaning is to have a reason or an object to live. For some scientists, the meaning of life would be to find out where or how life originated. Philosophers and those concerned with ethics ask how we could make this life better, or what is the most virtuous way to live. Religion and spirituality is of course concerned with how we must live this life, and where we would be after this. Thus, I’m surprised at those who either ignore the question or doesn’t even ask it at all. This then leads me to the question of life after this. Or is there such a thing?

I used to memorize Epicurus’ philosophy that “death does not concern us, because as long as we exist, death is not here. And when it does come, we no longer exist.” I thought it was cool not to be concerned about what happens next. But deep within me is a mixture of wonder and curiosity, fear and doubt. I wondered what must it be to experience death? So I was curious how such an experience could be. But of course I wouldn’t know. Who on earth would know? I didn’t dare attempt to find out either because I was afraid that somehow, something is wrong or missing from Epicurus’ statement. And so I doubted my own doubt. Death does concern me after all.

Again, I’ll borrow from Epicurus’ words but take license to alter it. “Death does concern us, because while we exist, we won’t know when it comes. And when it does come, where are we?”

Think about it.

Going back to my original question, what then is the meaning of my life? What is my purpose? Rick Warren opens his best selling book “The Purpose Driven Life” with the question “What on Earth am I here for?” But the basic tenet of his book, if I may phrase it loosely, is a that God has a generic purpose for us all. That we are designed to worship God, to belong to God’s family of believers, to become like Christ, to serve God and to fulfill God’s mission for us. I do not attempt to disagree with Warren’s model. But not only am I concerned with the “generic” purpose God has designed all of us for, but I am also concerned with the “specific” purpose God has planned for me.

My story is not yet done.

"What comes to mind when we think about God is the most important thing about us.”
- A.W. Tozer

“Everything in our lives is influenced by our view of God.” - Bill Bright, founder of Campus Crusade

These are two phrases quoted last April 1 by Pastor Peter. He said that “What we think tells who we are. How we behave is a determinant of what we know of God.” And that what matters is not whether we believe in God, but what we believe about God.

If that’s the case, there is really little difference then for those who do not believe in God and for those who believe in God but has wrong idea about Him. Simply put, all atheists and agnostics could be lumped together with theists who have wrong concept of God. To quote a phrase often made by our pastor “they are sincere, but they are sincerely wrong.”

Pastor Peter cited one wrong view of God in which I’m very much interested to ponder. That is the view that “God is not fair.” My friend Mel and I were just discussing last Sunday about some atheists whose reason not to believe God is because of the existence of evil. They deny the existence of God because for them, if there is a God why then would He allow evil to persist? But the conclusion to eliminate God is already flawed because the question does not deal with God’s existence. In fact, atheists or agnostics who have this rationale already acknowledge God’s existence unknowingly. Their only question then should be of why God allows such evil to persist. But in asking so, wouldn’t one be subject to defining God in his own term?

Whenever we feel the desire to question the fairness of God because of certain events in our lives, consider the words of God in Job 38:1-4: Then the Lord answered Job from the whirlwind: “Who is this that questions my wisdom with such ignorant words? Brace yourself like a man, because I have some questions for you, and you must answer them. Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell me, if you know so much.”

I have always believed that although God has revealed Himself to us through His Son Jesus Christ, there would still be limitations to our knowledge. Pastor Peter oftentimes illustrate that of an ant (or a bug of the same kind) trying to understand human. We can only know too much. Thus, if God can be fully explained and defined by man, then He is no God at all.

I am not promoting ignorance, neither am I belittling man’s capacity to understand and think. The human brain is such a complex machine to be belittled. On the opposite, I believe we should be like the Bereans (see Acts 17:11) who “received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.”

What then is our concept of God?

Acceptance. I guess this word differentiates the message of Christianity more than any other beliefs, more than any other philosophies there are. If other beliefs espouse exclusivity from other people, Christianity cannot do so, and must not do so. I hope that my meaning of acceptance would not be construed to equal compromise. No, Christianity (so must other belief should they believe it’s truthfulness) cannot be and should not be compromised.

The problems we face today emanate from our need to being accepted. Doctrinally, we of course know that this is all because of man’s sin problem. But because of the need to be accepted, we sometimes turn to other albeit mundane and temporal means to fill that void. Drugs, alcohol, nicotine and other abuse would seem to alleviate us of that dilemma. But does it go away? Why, does not even the need to accumulate wealth or be successful in our career oftentimes are results of our desire for acceptance? Don’t we feel accepted whenever we are on stage, and our talents recognized? And when we don’t get that feeling, where do most of us turn to?

Acceptance. This is specifically why the appeal of Christianity towards all genre of humanity is so intense. On the other hand, this is also the same reason why it is deemed by most to be so appalling. The simplicity of its message of forgiveness is sometimes so difficult to accept. Why am I left out to participate in my sanctification? Why can’t I earn my salvation? Am I so pathetic that there is simply nothing I can do on my power to earn it? Where do all of my achievements, the years of hardwork and suffering come into play?

The term “as is where is” is already a commonly accepted phrase in merchandising. This discreetly-worded phrase informs buyers that the merchandize they are buying would not be accepted for return for any defect. The good is sold “as is.” It also informs the buyer that transportation or delivery of the good is not part of the deal, thus “where is.” Whenever you would buy and see a phrase like this, you should be wary that the good you are buying has some defect somewhere. We are like that. Merchandize sold “as is where is.” And Christ accepted us for who we are, in whatever condition we are in.

"For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin." - Hebrews 4:15

I have always been fascinated by the divinity and humanity of Christ. And some questions related to the above passage remains a mystery to me.

How much temptation could Christ have suffered? Or did he even suffer at all being tempted? And although it says that he was “tempted, yet without sin,” would such temptation have an impact to Christ as to make him have the possibility to commit sin?

Why is it significant that I ask these things? If indeed we have a high priest such as Christ who can sympathize with our weaknesses, how intense was the temptation that he has undergone? Could he relate to the difficulty or the struggle that we do encounter every day, every hour, and even every minute from fighting temptation, in doing good and avoiding evil?

Another question related to this verse is the question of Christ’s divinity. That Christ, being tempted, therefore cannot be God if one reads James 1:13 which says, "Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am being tempted by God"; for God cannot be tempted by evil, and He Himself does not tempt anyone." But I will not concern myself on this issue this time in order not to muddle my concern on the depth of Christ’s temptation.

Great controversy has been raised when the novel by Nikos Kazantzakis, “The Last Temptation of Christ” was published. This was considered so blasphemous that the Roman Catholic Church included it in it’s List of Prohibited Books (Index Librorum Prohibitorum). Kazantzakis’ depiction of Christ is that of a very passionate and emotional human being whose mission he is trying to understand. In a scene in the dessert, a “snake with the eyes and breasts of a woman” taunted Christ and said “You are afraid of being alone. Your great-grandfather Adam had the same fear. He too shouted for help. His flesh and soul united, and woman emerged from his rib to keep him company.” In the same passage, Christ was being seduced by the serpent with the image of Mary Magdalene. “It’s Magdalene… it’s Magdalene… it’s Magdalene… it’s Magdalene you must save!” the snake hissed imperatively. “Not the Earth – forget about the Earth. It’s her, Magdalene, you must save!”

We all know that Kazantzakis’ novel has no doctrinal basis and is just a figment of his overly and overtly creative imagination. But the question cannot be denied. Has Christ undergone such temptations, or something similar to (if not even worse than) what Kazantzakis has written? Has he ever had the desire for a woman? We know that Christ had great compassion towards people, but has he ever had the same emotion as we have, having the ability to develop anger or rage? Could he have struggled and suffered the way we did? Or did he just brush them off aside casually and unperturbed?

How far could he have sympathized with us?