Skip to main content

A new year, a new you

2 Cor 5:17: Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!

New years are a good time for big changes. Time to move house. Or look for a new job. Maybe time to start a new diet & exercise routine. But - change is difficult. That’s why new year’s resolutions are so depressing. It’s so much easier not to have any changes. It’s so much easier to just give up. This is who I am, this is what I do. I’m not gonna change.

When TV ads talk about “a new year, a new you”, they mean makeup and gym classes and clothes. But it’s not actually a new us, it’s the old us, with makeup on. Or the old us, with new clothes on. That’s why the changes don’t work most of the time. It’s not actually a new us.

But 2 Cor 5 tells us we can actually have a new “us”. But this passage tells us – we actually can have a new you! It’s so new, that Paul can call it a new creation. The old person’s completely gone; it’s a whole new you. And there’s three great things about it.

First, God does it. We don't have to do this big change ourselves. When we go to the gym, we have to work out, we have to sweat and strain. But this change that Paul’s taking about is more like getting your hair and nails done. You just sit there, nice and comfortable. Someone else fusses over you, and you leave looking and feeling marvellous.

Second, the way God fusses over us is by fixing up our sin problem. We reject God; but God does the work needed to fix that. Most of the time, if someone upsets us, we get angry and wait for them to come and say sorry. And if they do, we might forgive them – slowly – because we really want to punish them. God’s not like that. He comes to us first – even before we say sorry – because he wants to fix up the relationship more than we do.

Thirdly, this change now gives us a new identity. We don’t belong to ourselves any more – we belong to God. We can give up our boring, petty, self-obsessed, world-bound ambitions and values and priorities. We can trade them in for much more interesting, eternal, useful ambitions and values and priorities. Like living for God-in-Christ, every hour of every day.

Nice for a change, isn’t it?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The different distractions of secularity and spirituality

There has been a lot of discussion about the recent 'vibe shift' away from radical atheism back towards an openness to the supernatural. I don't think this new spirituality is necessarily an openness to the unique claims of Christ. It will more probably replace one set of commonly-accepted misunderstandings about Jesus with another.  Under radical atheism, people dismissed the Biblical claims about Jesus' resurrection because they 'knew' that it was impossible. Jesus hadn't really died. He just passed out (after being beaten and whipped and crucified) and then woke up in the tomb (and rolled away the stone himself and overcame several guards). Or the disciples hallucinated that they saw him (even though Jewish beliefs of the time didn't expect one person to rise possessing eternal life himself; they expected a general resurrection at the end of time - see John 11:24 ). Or something else.  The so-called 'explanations' of Jesus' non-resurrectio...

A better understanding of nonbelief

The Nones Project is an ongoing study into the belief systems of people who call themselves non-religious. A few weeks ago one of the project leaders,  Ryan Burge  of Washington University,  posted some really interesting preliminary results  on his Substack.  1. We've probably heard of people who are spiritual but not religious (SBNRs). SBNRs were "the largest group of nones" in the sample. They believe in the supernatural realm but not necessarily in "a God." They are "deeply skeptical of religion but highly interested in spirituality," therefore individualistic and anti-institutional.  2. But this study differentiated SBNRs from people they called Nones In Name Only, NiNos. They different to SBNRs by being religious about their spiritual. They believe not just in the supernatural but in "God." And they tend to engage in traditional communal religious practices while SBNRs practice individualised eclectic bespoke spiritual practices. The s...

Wax and Wright on the definition of "mission"

Trevin Wax has written a clear, simple, and charitable introduction to a debate about the nature and boundaries of the kinds of Christian activities that validly should be called "mission." In brief:  Should we use a broad definition, where "mission" encompasses all the various purposes which God calls Christians and the church in general to perform, e.g. being ethical at work; general acts of care and charity; standing against systematic oppression and working towards justice instead? If so, "evangelism" is only one part of the church's mission - a central, necessary, and irreplaceable part, but only one part nonetheless. The latter kinds of activities don't save anyone for eternity, but they do genuine good in this world which please God. And that kind of good makes a real difference in many parts of the world which have not benefited from the kind of Christian moral transformation which the West benefited from - the kind of moral transformation...