So Zak and Hannah finally embrace and the clock starts the countdown to doomsday while the wicked angel, Richard, looks on with glee. There is the cliffhanger that may be resolved if a second series is made. I think we were expecting that.

There are some interesting touches that were worth a second look. Mrs Sheringham finally recognises whose side Carl is really on – and she does so without the benefit of the knowledge that the angels have. She is invited to go with him, has second thoughts, and his impatience at the station gives her pause for thought. He tries to appeal to her pride and her vanity and at first she is tempted until it dawns on her that her departure is part of Richard’s machinations. What struck me is the thought that what tempts us can seem so plausible to begin with; and that, like Mrs Sheringham, we don’t have the benefit of angel-knowledge to determine the true motives of the person testing us. Mostly, for us, will be ordinary folk we know who will test us rather than a dark angel in disguise.

Meanwhile, in the cathedral Zak and Richard slug it out and we are left with the impression that Zak has overcome the temptation to leave his heavenly calling and become a mortal human being in order to marry Hannah. Richard is able to test him because the truth is that it is what he, Zak, really wants.

What both of those incidents remind us is that what often tempts us the most, what we find hardest to resist, is not the obvious evil deed but the plausible argument. The devil will use the truth against us if it suits him. Whoever wrote this seems to have understood what is going on in the temptation of Jesus (see either Matthew chapter 4 or Luke chapter 4).

Meanwhile I have a serious theological objection to Eternal Law (much as I have enjoyed watching it). It seems to be based on the idea that to fall in love is to fall from grace. That is not so. Some of the things we may do in the name of love may be misguided or even be dis-graceful but love itself is not wrong. Of course, love is not just about what we feel but also about what we do and being attracted to someone may lead to love but it is not the same as love.

As for Zak and Hannah we are missing crucial information: why did Zak had to leave? Was he already married to someone else? But angels don’t marry in the way that humans do (see Mark chapter 12 verses 18 to 25) so that can’t be it. And Mr Mountjoy: we assume that is a pseudonym for God. But is that God who created and loved his creation, revealed through Jesus and His Spirit; or is that a god only concerned about Law and right judgements? Either there is more to Mr Mountjoy than we have been told so far or else he is not the God that I recognise from the New Testament.

I look forward to having some of these questions answered.