Christians believe that what happened at Christmas was profoundly materialistic: God loved the world so much that the barrier between matter and spirit was broken by God becoming matter, not by us becoming spirit. And further more this did not happen just to a group of well-trained, biblically-sound Christians but to and for everyone.The materialistic delight of non-believers, the sentimental aesthetics of half-believers, even the withdrawal of non-Christians are all perfectly appropriate responses – and often much more fun. But we Christians just feel hurt when people can’t see it the way we do. Still, hurt feelings do not justify our insistence on flexing our cultural muscle.There is a way out of this confusion. Perhaps all of Britain, should take a leaf from Scottish history and hold out for Hogmanay: a genuinely inclusive feast of hope at the turning of a new year. Nothing in this would stop Christians, a week earlier, having the most rigorously pious religious celebrations, which would inconvenience no one else and please at least some of us. It would be a massive step towards real tolerance and a multi-faith society, and it would even be more Christian..

What’s that you say? They believe what? They believe God sent His only son to be born on Earth so that He could grow up to be tortured and executed? You must mean that as it turned out He was executed, but surely .. Come on! … you’re telling me He was tortured and executed because that was the whole point of His being born in the first place?

OK, OK, have it your own way, but why did God want His son to be tortured? As a punishment for His sins? Huh Those must have been quite some sins. I’ll say! What’s that again? As a punishment for somebody else’s sins? You’re joking, of course No? Well, whose sins was He being punished for? Adam’s. Who’s Adam? Adam didn’t really exist? You’re telling me God deliberately had His only beloved son tortured to death as a punishment for the sins of a man who never even existed? Wow, that’s quite some God you’ve got there. I mean, didn’t He ever hear of the laws of evidence?
Well, anyway, what were these sins that Adam, who never existed, was supposed to have committed? There was only one sin? Well, let’s hear it then What was the charge? This had better be good Don’t tell me, let me guess He was caught scrumping apples.Oh no, this I cannot bear. You are not serious! He was caught scrumping apples? Only one apple? And that was it Well I’ll be darned. What was that again? It may not even have been an apple, it is just described as a fruit? Well I guess it didn’t really exist either, so it doesn’t matter what kind of fruit it wasn’t.Run that by me again Yeah Yeah.

OK, that sounds a bit less gross – it wasn’t really Adam’s sin; that’s just a metaphor for all the sins of all mankind Fine, fine. I suppose next you’re going to tell me that includes those sins that hadn’t yet been committed. Oh, it does? Yes, I reckon by now I should have expected that.But if God had wanted to forgive us for our ancestors’ and our descendants’ sins, why didn’t He just go right ahead and forgive us – or them? What’s with the beatings and the crucifixion? I guess He just loves capital punishment, huh?That’s quite some role model you’ve got there.. Everything David Trimble does in these uncertain times is larger than life, magnified and scrutinised for its electoral meaning. The Ulster Unionist leader’s potential to decide the election date by bringing the Government down in a confidence vote sees to that.