coming towards us -- which I think is exactly the same point, incidentally, as I think that Tim was making when he said conversation about the Spirit was a prompt to be in the Spirit. When we're talking about God we're talking about the protagonism, the real protagonism, behind everything that is, and of which we are the symptoms -- rather than an object within our field of vision. Does that make, you know...? Now, and again this is an old, old dogmatic point, that ad extra -- and this is a straightforward dogmatic point -- that ad extra all the activities of God are single. So there is no difference between the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit acting ad extra . If we recognise the Spirit doing something, we are recognising God -- who is Father, Son and Spirit -- doing something. The only distinction -- if we can talk about a distinction -- is in the 'inner life' of God. Ad extra , there is only one acting out -- we are monotheists, not tritheists. It's not three persons turning up and treating us differently: it's one Protagonism into whose inner life we are called. Does that make -- just trying to remind people of basic [inaudible]... But that means that when we talk about Spirit, we're talking about the Creator, making alive a criterion for who the Creator is -- which is the role we normally associate with Jesus -- when we talk about Jesus