The Rest of the Old Old Story

Thank God for wonderful, incredible, influential people like Martin Luther King, Mahatma Gandhi, and even Martin Luther. They stood in them middle of the way and cried out for truth, even when people were purposely trying to run them over.

I try to follow them, bravely saying the things I believe I’m supposed to say, though obviously on a much, much smaller basis.

But there are others who change the world in a different way. They don’t stop everyone. They just stop the people who are willing to take the time and drink in their beauty.

I doubt Rachel Fagan will ever be doing much shouting in the middle of the way unless there’s a fire. But if you don’t stop to smell that flower by the side of the road, then you’re only partially living life. All work and no play, as they say, makes Jack stupid.

So, here’s a link to blogs from a couple of redheads, though that’s not why I’m linking to them. Hang around my blog too much, and while you’ll find hope, the diligent pursuit of “something more” can get tiring and oppressive after a while.

These here … these are fresh air. Take a deep breath, and be a little happier.

http://rachel-birdsong.blogspot.com/2011/04/my-encounter-12-miles-away.html

http://chloe-lifewithfreckles.blogspot.com/

Rachel’s just wonderful. What you read in that post above is how she is all the time. There’s hardly anyone like her. I don’t think there’s supposed to be. Just a few flowers like that planted, not for the rest of us to mimic–that’s impossible–but for the rest of us to be refilled with hope and joy and energy, to restore our color vision, and to keep us believing that life is good despite the hardships.

Chloe’s growing and paying attention. I linked to her blog, not a specific post, because no matter what day you’ll go there, you’ll find her learning in her own exuberant, right-brained way. (The right half of my brain is like a summer home. I really like it, but I don’t go there very often.)

“Paying attention” may not seem to fit into the last paragraph, but not everyone is paying attention, so they waste a lot of life’s lessons that come their way. I put “growing” in front of “paying attention,” but, really, that’s backwards. She’s growing because she’s paying attention.

There’s a lot of life that just happens, but the rest of your life will be much better if you pay attention through the boring bits so that you’re still paying attention when the lessons come.

Still don’t know what I mean? Follow Chloe’s blog.

Image by Chloe, used without permission .

I’ve been reading Love Wins by Rob Bell. I’m 89% done (percentage courtesy of Kindle).

***I wrote this a week ago; I’m finished with the book now.***

Originally I was not going to blog about it. After all, a thousand blogs have already covered his book. What could I possibly add?

Then I reached 89% of the way through the book.

I definitely have something to add.

Universal Salvation

First, a couple things need to be stated clearly. Rob Bell most definitely teaches universal salvation in the book. He doesn’t hint at it. He doesn’t suggest it might be true. He doesn’t ask questions only to get us thinking about it. He clearly and forcefully argues for universal salvation, providing one of the most comprehensive list of verses on the subject I’ve ever seen.

I read a blog post by Greg Boyd back when he was one of the only people who had read the book. Boyd suggests that Rob Bell is just speaking generally and asking questions. That’s very sweet of Mr. Boyd, but I don’t believe it’s accurate.

It’s true enough that when Rob Bell gets down to the very heart of the question—when he directly confronts the issue of universal salvation—he does indeed refuse to answer it. He says we can be free to speculate. But look at what he says along the way.

Chapter 4 of Love Wins is entitled “Does God Get What God Wants?” In that chapter Rob Bell points out that God wants all people to be saved, referencing the statement to that effect in 1 Tim. 2. 2 Pet. 3:9 says the same thing.

He makes it clear what the central point of the chapter is:

Will all people be saved, or will God not get what God wants? Does this magnificent, mighty, marvelous God fail in the end? (ch. 4; emphasis his; I have no page numbers since I’m reading this on Kindle)

A little later he adds:

This insistence that God will be united and reconciled with all people is a theme the writers and prophets return to again and again. They are very specific … constantly affirming the simple fact that God does not fail.

Then:

At the center of the Christian tradition since the first church have been a number who insist that history is not tragic, hell is not forever, and love, in the end, wins and all will be reconciled to God.

Finally, at the end of the chapter, when he dodges the question of universal salvation, he dodges it by saying the following:

How could someone choose another way with a universe of love and joy and peace right in front of them—all of it theirs if they would simply leave behind the old ways and receive the new life of the new city in the new world? The answer to how is “Yes.”

Bell goes on to explain that we see people “choose to live in their own hells all the time.”

Thus, the question is left open, but look at how it is left open! It is left open by the statement that anyone can be saved, even in the afterlife, because God wants everyone to be saved. They will only not be saved if they continue to reject the love of God eternally.

Saying What You Mean

I don’t have a problem with questioning tradition until it’s proven to be apostolic. I do it myself regularly. But I believe one should honestly admit when he’s purposely disagreeing with the status quo.

When people ask if Rob Bell is adopting a position of universal salvation, they are asking if he is rejecting the common teaching that some—and probably most—people will go to hell eternally, being tormented by God.

Bell not only rejects that teaching, he says that teaching creates a God that is horrific and that no one could possibly want to believe in. He spends a lot of chapter 5 explaining why.

Again, I don’t necessarily have a problem with that. In fact, I agree that eternal torture never seems just. But why deny it when asked about it?

And I’ve seen Rob Bell being interviewed about his book. He does not get to the point.

Do I Agree With Love Wins?

I’ve already said that I agree that no one can really believe that it’s just to torture a person eternally for sins committed during a short time on earth.

Even worse, most fundamentalists believe that God will torture a person eternally if they commit even one sin during their lifetime. In other words, we’re supposed to believe that God is a just judge when he torments a person in flames—eternally—for cheating on a test in 5th grade.

Sorry. That’s nonsense.

If that’s Scriptural, then I have to admit that I’m prepared to reject the Scriptures. That’s not justice. Only a monster would do such a thing, and I refuse to believe that the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the God who delivered me at the name of Jesus, is a monster.

I don’t believe that going to hell for one sin is even remotely Scriptural, however. That teaching is less than a thousand years old, and the teaching it came from, that we’re all guilty because Adam sinned, didn’t show up until at least three centuries after Christ. We inherited death from Adam, a death we are already living in (Eph. 2:1-3), but we did not inherit a guilt for Adam’s sin for which we will have to face judgment on the last day (or immediately after death).

Scripture teaches that even those who don’t know about Christ can be “excused” by living according to their conscience (Rom. 2:14-15). Scripture also teaches that God will forget all the sins that a person has committed if they turn from their sins to a righteous life. No sacrifice is mentioned as necessary for this (Ezek. 18:21-22). Even further, King David says that God doesn’t want sacrifice to forgive sins; he wants a contrite heart (Ps. 51:16-17).

Thus, it’s clear that Scripture does not teach that people go to hell for committing one sin. In fact, people won’t go to hell even for many sins if they turn from their wickedness and do righteousness. Their wickedness will be forgotten, says the Scripture, and because of the righteousness which they have done they will live (Ezek. 18:21-22).

Rob Bell makes some beautiful, powerful points in Love Wins. I highly recommend reading it … unless you haven’t read the New Testament a few times. If you haven’t, then you should read the writings of the apostles first. Read Rob Bell later.

Rob Bell is a great, great teacher, but it is the apostles to whom Jesus committed the faith.

And Rob Bell leaves some important parts of it out.

Vengeance and Wrath

Jesus, according to the apostles, really will take vengeance on those who reject the Gospel.

The Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven, in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God and that do not obey the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord. (2 Thess. 1:7-8)

Admittedly, Bell takes the time to argue that the word “everlasting” there shouldn’t be everlasting. Okay, fine. Let’s give him that.

Nonetheless, nothing about Love Wins acknowledges the God who punishes with “age-lasting” destruction and takes vengeance.

Nor do I think he’s terribly honest about the history of universalism in the church.

Errors in Love Wins

I’ve read all the writings of the 2nd century church. The claim that those who deny an eternal hell have been “at the center” since the first church is just not true. No one in the 2nd century church suggests such a thing.

Rob Bell references Origen and Clement of Alexandria as sources for such a teaching. There is no doubt that Origen taught universal salvation. Clement of Alexandria was one of his teachers, so it’s not a stretch to think that Clement agreed with him, but I don’t think it’s true, and Bell gives no reference and no quote for his claim.

Origen, by the way, belongs to the third century, and Clement began teaching around A.D. 190, almost at the end of the second century.

Either way, two men do not constitute “at the center,” especially when we remember that one taught the other. They were both from Alexandria, though Origen moved to Caesarea over disagreements with the bishop (probably jealousies by the bishop). Alexandria was a center of learning, the kind of place from which unusual speculation is likely to arise.

Descriptions of the Faith Vs. Teachings

Not only that, both Origen and Clement are teachers, and their writings are teachings.

There’s nothing wrong with that, but if you want to find what is “in the center” of Christian teaching in the early churches, you should read descriptions of the faith, not teachings and arguments.

Justin Martyr, for example, writes a description of what Christians believe to the emperor in an effort to have persecution dispelled. He is not trying to argue a position or think through a teaching. He is trying to honestly describe Christians and Christianity. He writes:

Among us the prince of the wicked spirits is called the serpent, satan, and the devil, as you can learn by looking into our writings. He will be sent into the fire with his host, and the men who follow him, and will be punished for endless duration. (First Apology 28)

Thirty years later, Irenaeus wrote a defense of the Christian faith directed against gnosticism. In it he describes “this preaching and this faith,” which the church “although scattered throughout the whole world … carefully preserves … as if she had but one soul and one and the same heart” (Against Heresies I:10:2). Only a few sentences are given to describe this faith that the church held through the whole world as though she had one on the same heart, but it includes this:

… just judgment towards all, so that he may send … the ungodly, unrighteous, wicked, and profane among men into everlasting fire, but may … confer immortality on the righteous, holy, and those who have kept his commandments. (ibid. I:10:1)

Punishment of “endless duration” is what you find being taught by the early Christians “as though they have but one soul.” These things represent what was “at the center” of the first churches. Speculation by two men from Alexandria don’t change that.

Really Great Things in Love Wins

Rob Bell has some really great teachings in Love Wins.

For example, I think his description of the story of the Prodigal Son is by far the best I’ve ever heard. He explains that there are several stories in this one story. Each son has a story about himself, and the father has a story about both sons.

The father’s story is different than the sons’ stories, and believing the father’s stories about themselves can be life-changing.

The prodigal son himself believes that he is unworthy to be the father’s son. The father explains that nothing of the sort is true. The brother believes that he has slaved for years for nothing. The father explains that he was not a slave and that everything that belonged to the father belonged also to the sons.

Bell also provides a pretty decent description of the atonement in Love Wins. He explains that there are many descriptions of the atonement, and that we should embrace all of them and use the ones that are most relevant in explaining the atonement.

That portion will give you a bigger–and more Scriptural–picture of the atonement than you’ve ever had before. Simply excellent.

It’s not what Bell says to which I object. It’s what he doesn’t say–what he leaves out. That I’ve explained above in the errors section.

It seemed to me that these things were worth mentioning. My conclusion? It is the same as what I said above.

Read Love Wins, but make sure you’ve read the apostles repeatedly first.

One of the things that has always stood out to me about God is how he takes sides. Me, I honor peace-making in all situations. I’m always looking for a way to reconcile everybody, and I’m very slow to pick sides in an argument. I prefer never having to.

Not God. He’s God, so he figures everyone ought to be on his side. He also figures no opinion is as educated as his, so he always has a side.

It can be good to be slow to pick a side in an argument. Modern Christians are very prone to having a nauseous obsession (this is one possible translation of noseo in 1 Tim. 6:4) with disputes. In many such cases, God’s position is that both sides are in sin.

But even in such cases, God usually isn’t looking for a man (or woman) who sweetly settles the disputants down. He’s looking for a disciple who will speak straightly enough that the Holy Spirit has something to back up.

We forget—I know I often do—that our words can carry power because they are of God, not just because they’re full of wisdom. God doesn’t want to persuade the world with words. He wants to convict them by his Spirit.

Who can deny that Jesus was a straight talker, giving God something to back up?

Looking for the Kingdom of God

I’m not really on subject yet. My subject is the fact that Joseph of Arimathaea was considered honorable by God because he was looking for the kingdom of God (Mark 15:43; Luke 23:50-51), despite the fact that he was being a disciple only secretly because he feared the Jews (Jn. 19:38).

Joseph was taking God’s side. He wanted God to rule. His opinions agreed with God’s opinions, not those of the Pharisees around him, nor those that made others happy.

This mattered to God. The Scriptures call him a disciple, and they call him good and just.

I read a book by N.T. Wright that said that "righteousness" is a very "covenant" word. It doesn’t have so much to do with good deeds (though 1 Jn. 3:7-10 makes it clear that it can). It has to do with being in good covenant standing with God. Righteousness means you are fully in the covenant; you have not violated it.

I believe this. It not only rings true with me, but it helps reconcile some of the things Paul says about righteousness as a gift and what John says about the practice of righteousness (1 Jn. 3:7-10, as just mentioned, and 2:3-4 as well).

Joseph had a big problem. He was being a secret disciple. Jesus once said that if we fail to acknowledge him before men, he won’t acknowledge us before his Father. In some way, though, Joseph was at least acknowledging Christ because Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John all knew he was a disciple. Further, Jesus has acknowledged Joseph as a disciple to the whole world by having the Holy Spirit include him in Scripture.

And he gave him one kudo … one only. Joseph was looking for the kingdom of God.

What Are You Looking For?

So you don’t smoke pot, you don’t cuss, you buy Girl Scout Cookies (mint chocolate, of course), and you don’t watch that obnoxious, evil, offensive, and effeminate Jack Sparrow on Pirates of the Caribbean. Congratulations for all those good things, but …

What are you looking for?

Are you looking for the kingdom of God? Or are you looking for a nice retirement, a job with benefits, a college education, and the eternal reign of the glorious congress, president, and supreme court of the U.S. of A.?

Beyond the question of whether you’re doing good things, who’s side are you on?

God really cares about that.

Do you wonder why a man like David was "after God’s own heart"? I assure you, it wasn’t because he had nine wives, ten concubines, nor because he killed Uriah to marry Bathsheba, nor because he gave Abigail two whole months to mourn before he married her. It also wasn’t because he flipped back and forth between ordering people to leave Shimei alone and ordering them to kill him.

David was always on God’s side.

And he didn’t care whom he offended. (As a side note, I’m campaigning for the reinstatement of the word “whom.” You use it wherever you would use “him,” and you use “who” where you would use “he.”)

Even Samson, who did not qualify as a man after God’s own heart, was greatly used by God. Despite his problems, he always fought on Israel’s side, even when the motivation was sometimes really, really selfish and juvenile.

It’s God’s Feelings That Matter

Real prophets are persecuted.

It’s because they’re really careful about God’s feelings.

It’s okay, even important, to be kind.

It’s not okay to risk hurting God’s feelings.

Who will walk in the holy hill of the Lord? He … in whose eyes a vile person is despised, but who honors those who fear the Lord. ~Psalm 15:4

I was at a wedding a couple weeks ago, and something someone said got me to thinking about the qualities of a good wife.

If I were to give advice to someone—my sons, for example—about what constitutes a good wife, here’s what I would say. I base this on 23 years of marriage, 29 years of watching Christian marriages, and 15 years of living in community and thus getting to live with other married couples under the same roof. I’m also speaking to Christians who want to do God’s will with their spouse. If you don’t want to do God’s will, then I have no advice for you on any subject except that you should repent before the day you wish you had.

An excellent Wife Who Can Find?

This post turned out pretty long, so let me just list the three qualities I think are most important in a wife, then explain why.

• Devoted to God
• Adventurous
• Independent/Ambitious

Devoted to God

There are religious men who are very concerned about whether their wife is submissive. It’s true that the Scriptures command wives to submit to their husbands, but a wife that submits to her husband without making it clear when she believes him to be outside the will of God is worthless.

If you’re a disciple, you want a wife that loves God more than she loves you. Such a wife will benefit you.

That’s not to say that wives shouldn’t submit when they disagree with their husbands. Within reason, they should.

You don’t want a wife who will simply do what you say when you’re out of God’s will. You don’t want a wife that you have cow into submission. You want a wife that is devoted to God. Then submission will take care of itself.

The Scriptures may command a wife to submit to her husband, but it never commands a husband to rule his wife. A good husband will lead his wife, and a good wife will know when her husband is trusting God and trying to do his will. (It will make no difference whether she actually agrees it’s God’s will. Submission is not about agreement. If a wife only submits when she agrees, then she’s never submitted at all. Nonetheless, a wife should always be heard and considered.)

Hmm. What a complicated subject. I hope I haven’t said too much. That all seemed important, though.

Okay, the point is, men, you want a wife that is devoted to God first and you only second. You need a wife who will be greatly offended if you offend God. You want a wife you will speak her mind.

And you want a wife who will follow you to the very gates of Hell because she can trust God that far as long as she knows his will is being pursued.

Deception, by the way, is never a Christian’s problem. Deception is the result of disobedience (or of not being in the church). Where the church exists and obeys, there will never be deception, because God will speak to the church and cure deception.

Most churches, however, have too many rules to completely obey God. When God starts breaking out of their box, they let him go. Then they safely and peacefully settle into their rebellion and deception, thinking that everything’s just fine because they haven’t wandered and are sitting in the same place.

I’m off subject again.

Get a wife who loves God more than she loves you.

Adventurous

Adventurous is better than even courageous. An adventurous woman is already a courageous woman, by definition.

If you’re going to follow God, then you better have an adventurous woman because you never know when God is going to make you an adventurous man, whether by sending you somewhere or asking you to take a stand that he needs taken.

An adventurous woman will also be a selfless woman. You’ve already chosen a woman devoted to God, adding adventurous to that assures you’ll have a wife who isn’t worried about the things of this world. Too much to do for God! She’ll let you fill the house with the needy (I don’t necessarily mean needing money) and those who can’t pay you back because she delights in the adventure of caring for Jesus. She’ll let you move her out of her perfect home because she wants to see what God has at the other end of your move.

Independent/Ambitious

You want an independent, perhaps even ambitious wife. She has her own ideas of how to serve God. Why should your service for God be based on only your mind and spirit? Between the two of you, you have two minds and two spirits. Praise God for a wife who brings hers to the partnership!

None of us ought to be selfishly ambitious, but your wife ought to be dreaming about how she’s going to serve God. She ought to have things God has put on her heart, as well as helping you with what God has put on your heart (and vice versa). Marriage is a partnership.

The man should lead. He should have one major quality that qualifies him for leadership. He should be able to take a beating, take responsibility, suffer, and care nothing about himself, but only about God. In that sense, he should be stronger than his wife. He should have the final say, and he should take all the blame and make every effort to bear all the pain of every bad decision.

And he ought to do so gladly.

There’s nothing more useless than a wimpy husband.

Sorry for being so blunt, but cowards and the faithless are listed before murderers, the sexually immoral, and idolaters as those who are thrown in the lake of fire. Yes, my friend, you might want to consider that it’s possibly worse for a Christian to be a chicken than to be an adulterer or a homosexual.

Pluck it up.

Summing It Up

This post is kind of rambling. I did not stay on the subject very well. I hope there’s something here than benefitted you.

I have a wife that’s devoted to God, adventurous, independent and ambitious. I picked her carefully. I’ve made my fair share of mistakes, and I have my fair share of weaknesses, but I proved to be a master at picking a wife.

Of course, you better love God enough and be tough enough to have a wife like that. You don’t have to be particularly smart or talented. You just have to be courageous and full of love for the will of God. Everything else will work itself out.

Today I found the worst “wife birthday” card ever.

I was at WalMart (yes, I confess I was shopping at Corporate Evil HQ) for a birthday card for my wife, and I found one that said … Well, I’ll have to paraphrase because I can’t remember word for word:

Dear wife,
I love you because you understand me. You love me despite my faults, and you see me for who I am.

What???

Now, I want you to pause here, look away, and decide whether you agree that’s a really terrible card. If you don’t understand, then what I’m about to tell you will change your life and your relationship with everyone.

Pause, pause, pause, while you’re not looking and deciding why it’s a terrible card.

…

The World’s Worst “Wife’s Birthday” Card

Can you paraphrase what that card says? Here, let me give you a different paraphrase:

“I love you because you think about me and let me talk about myself even when it’s your birthday. You’re not bothered by the fact that I can’t get my mind off myself.”

If you’re a Christian, you have to do a lot better than that—and with more than your wife.

At Rose Creek Village, we like to say that if you want to speak into another person’s life, you have to answer three questions for them: Do you love me? Do you see me? Do you care?

You can answer those questions with your eyes or with your words. You can answer that question in advance by the way you treat the person that you’re talking to. But in some way, you need to answer those questions—and answer them all with yes—before you can really expect them to hear what you have to say.

That world’s worst wife’s birthday card doesn’t answer those questions, it asks them.

Husbands, at least on your wife’s birthday, surely you can answer those questions for her, not tell her you appreciate that she answers those questions for you! Talk about selfish! Good grief.

If you’re one of those guys who would have bought a card like that, then it’s time to look at yourself ONE LAST TIME. Acknowledge your selfishness, repent, and forget about whether anyone, including your wife, understands you. UNDERSTAND THEM INSTEAD!

I think it was Frances of Assissi who prayed:

Father, grant that I may never seek
So much to be consoled as to console
To be understood as to understand
To be loved as to love with all of my heart

Time to pray that prayer, then buy a card that talks about her, not you.

A Final Note

Some years back, I used to run a warehouse by myself. Every day UPS would come by and pick up the packages I’d packed. The UPS driver was a real chatty fellow, very pleasant to be around.

Anyway, he’d get to telling stories, and then he’d stop and say, "Enough about me. Let’s talk about you. What do you think about me?"

He was joking. Make sure when you act like that, you are, too.

Tags: birthday card, love, self, selfishness

 

This is a shameless, self-promotion of my ebook. It’s a reprint of my Christian History Newsletter.

I’m allowing myself to do both because the general reaction to the ebook—It’s a full-fledged 440-page book on the Council of Nicea—has been surprise that it’s so interesting. This blog explains why they’re surprised, and why we shouldn’t be.

Ready?

The Council of Nicea transformed the faith to which you and I belong. But who knows?

Christian history doesn’t arouse images of excitement and urgency. When I write “the Council of Nicea,” almost no one thinks, “This will be fun!”

That’s not the fault of the story. The Council of Nicea could easily be a Hollywood movie. Intrigue, murder, vying for power, sinister plots, religious hypocrisy, but also some gallant, earnest, and courageous men and women.

The motto of Christian History for Everyman has always been that we’re rescuing our heritage and stories from the boring halls of academia. Think about it. What is history? Isn’t it the collection of stories and facts that we think are the most interesting, exciting, and memorable of all time?

How could that be boring?

It’s a saying that truth is stranger than fiction. We all can think of instances where we’ve said, “That’s too far out to be made up.”

Hollywood gives us, mostly, the made-up stuff.

Exciting as that is, real history’s BETTER!

In the Beginning Was the Logos

I’m releasing a book today (an ebook; the printed version will be available around May 15). Only friends have read it so far, and the universal reaction is:

• Wow. I never dreamed this would be interesting!

Of course it’s interesting!!!

You have to work to make the Council of Nicea boring. You have to work even harder to make the Council of Nicea boring for Christians.

• It affects your faith!
• This is your heritage!
• It’s full of fascinating twists and turns and the most incredible scheming!

Arius, the man who started all the hoopla, was excommunicated by a council of over 100 bishops.

Why didn’t that simply resolve the issue?

The answer is that a distant relative of the emperor used his political influence to move himself from the insignificant town of Berytus to the residence of the emperor in Nicomedia. His name was Eusebius, and he hated the bishop of Alexandria–the very man who had led the excommunication of Arius.

Further, both Arius and Eusebius had been taught by an elder from Antioch named Lucian. Lucian had been out of communion with the church of Antioch for at least 16 years and possibly 35. Later, though, he’d returned, was martyred, and today he’s “Saint” Lucian, whose feast day is celebrated every year on January 7.

Eusebius gave Arius just the leg up he needed, and the rest, as they say is history.

But what history!

In their efforts to have the bishop of Alexandria framed for some crime and removed, Eusebius managed to get hold of a severed human hand. He claimed that the bishop of Alexandria had tortured a bishop who agreed with Arius, then cut off his hand to use in magic rites.

Unfortunately, the supposedly tortured elder, named Arsenius, couldn’t contain his curiosity. So he turned up in a tavern not far from the court.

He was spotted.

And the rest, as they say, is history.

The stories are incredible. The twists, delightful. The information, crucial.

The Bishop of Alexandria

I mentioned the bishop of Alexandria above. I actually mentioned two of them, but I didn’t tell you because it seemed a distraction. Eusebius hated both of them.

One excommunicated Arius and battled Eusebius at the Council of Nicea. The other was Nicea’s greatest champion afterward.

How did that first bishop meet the second?

That story, too, is fascinating, but I’m not telling it to you here.

The Book

If you’re getting this newsletter, then you’ve been to Christian-history.org, and you liked something enough to sign up for my newsletter. I haven’t had time to do the newsletter since December because I’ve been writing this book, which was research-intensive, to say the least.

Hopefully, if you’ve read much of my site at all, you know the incredible effort I put into every page. I don’t gloss over things. I research them, and I tell you where the stories came from. Whenever possible, I tell you stories from the people who were there.

In the Beginning Was the Logos is no different.

The Council of Nicea made some decisions. Their creed is recited in millions of churches every week to this day.

I want to show you that almost every church that recites it pays very little attention to what it says.

Two Men Named Eusebius

There was another man named Eusebius at the Council of Nicea. He was a historian, and he was having some trouble with both sides of the debate.

So when the creed was formed, Eusebius the historian asked some questions. He asked lots of questions. Then he wrote a letter.

• “We have all concurred, but not without due examination.”
• “On justifiable grounds we resisted to the last moment”
• “[We] received them without dispute when, on mature deliberation … they appeared to agree”

He asked the meaning of every controversial expression in the creed. Then he wrote to his church and told them what the council itself said those words meant.

Does anyone care? Why would we forget such things?

They brawled in bars over these words, and they beat each other–quite literally to death–in the streets over these things.

Why? What was so important?

What can we learn from this most momentous event in the history of the church?

I believe that this is the easiest to understand, the easiest to verify, the most interesting, and the most believable book answering those questions that exists.

What I’m hoping is that this email and what you’ve seen on my site makes you believe me enough to find out. I’ve convinced the friends who know and trust me. They expressed genuine surprise as well as some joy that this history can belong to them as well. But can I convince you?

It’s an ebook right now. It will also be in print in about a month. You can buy it now at:

http://www.christian-history.org/ibwl-ch-news

That link will take you straight to Christian History for Everyman’s page about the book.

For this blog and for the Christian History Newsletter, I’m offering half price, at $9.95, until April 15. (This book is over 400 pages. It’s a full treatment of the subject, and it’s quick-paced all the way through.) I’ll put the price back to $19.95 the next day and advertise it on Christian History for Everyman as well. For now, it’s just those who read this blog and get my newsletter that can get the book!

You will never have felt so close to history before, and you will never have been more confident that you know what, where, who, and why about any other event of history. This event matters to all of us.

I’m really looking for help on the title of my book. I’ve got a little help so far, and I’ve learned that I’m not as bad at titles as I thought. Titling a book is just difficult!

I have four chapters available online at the Council of Nicea page at Christian History for Everyman. A number of people have downloaded them‐yes, I have a way of tracking you!—for which I’m glad.

Please let me know what you think, and give me title suggestions. At Christian History for Everyman, you can use the Contact Me button on the NavBar to send me an email. There’s also a link there for title suggestions (use the link in the paragraph above). You can also use the comment section here.

Here’s the titles I’ve considered so far. Feedback on those would be great, too!

I have an awesome picture that would go with the middle one. Jeremiah Briggs, my friend and brother and incredible artist, told me I can use a great painting of a boy holding a shining object in his hands. You can’t see the object, but it lights up his face and the front of his body. It would work great with In the Beginning was the Logos.

Thank you for any and all feedback!

I posted earlier today, too, with more content .

If you read my blog, you probably know that I’ve been working on a book about the Council of Nicea. My writing part is done. All I’m doing now is formatting.

I’m having trouble picking a title, so this blog post is for two reasons:

• You can read four chapters of the book for free. You can find the links at the Council of Nicea page at Christian History for Everyman.
• After you’ve read those, I’m taking title suggestions! If I use yours, I’ll give a free, signed copy of the book (for whatever that’s worth) and a $25 gift certificate to amazon.com.

For the record, I’ve tried three titles so far:

• Setting It Straight: An Honest Man’s Look at the Council of Nicea
• Going the Wrong Way: An Honest Man’s Look at the Council of Nicea
• In the Beginning Was the Logos: The Council of Nicea for Everyman

I’m not very good at title creating. Any help or feedback is really appreciated.

I wrote someone recently and told them that the best argument for some of the things I teach is Rose Creek Village. (Not that RCV does what I teach; I teach what RCV does.) I described “great power, great joy, and great satisfaction in God.”

Honestly, though, not everyone at Rose Creek Village believes that’s true.

I know a couple people, right here at our village, who would say that they can’t do anything because they can never get permission for the things that are on their heart. I always wonder if they live at the same place I do. In fact, I ask them, when I hear something like that, whether they live at the same place I do.

I’m talking about real personal stuff here, but it applies to all Christians.

The difference is not where we live or what we’re told. Those couple people and I have two major differences.

• I don’t think I’ve been told no until I’ve been told no.
• I’m willing to risk making people angry if I think I’m doing God’s will.

Maybe those both could be summed up in one statement: I care less what people think about me.

It’s not that I’m assertive by nature. All the psychological tests I’ve ever taken say that I’m extremely introverted. Growing up, I was shy and picked on all the time. I’m terrified to talk to strangers.

It bothers me greatly when people don’t like what I’m doing. When I say something controversial, and people don’t like it, I get nervous and jittery. It takes a great effort of will to choose to stand on a controversial truth.

But I do it.

I don’t feel like I have a choice. If I give up on a truth that comes from God, then I believe that God will give up on me. I get that from the verse where Jesus says that if we’re ashamed of him here, then he’ll be ashamed of us there.

So I don’t like it, but I do it anyway.

I’m a pretty good teacher, you know. I can be entertaining. I can say what people want to hear, and they’ll all pat me on the back when I’m done. Sometimes, when I lead a Bible study and I encourage everyone to talk, I’ll have people come up to me after and say, “I came to hear you talk, not them. You’re a lot more interesting. Do those others have to talk?”

I have a couple friends who are pastors. They became pastors by, well, lying. They said they agreed to a statement of faith that I know they don’t agree with, and they did so because they were told everyone does that. One of them told me, “You can’t repair a sinking ship from the outside.”

I can’t do that. I can’t do that at RCV, either. I’m at RCV because it’s the church. No, I don’t mean its the only church. I mean it’s the church. It’s people, gathered together for the purpose of following Jesus Christ.

So I listen to the church. When I say, “I think this,” and everyone disagrees with me, then I assume that the church is the pillar and support of the truth, not me. I yield.

But when everyone frowns, and says, “I don’t like it,” that doesn’t mean anything at all. I make them think about what they don’t like. If I think it’s God, then I go do what they don’t like. Maybe I’m wrong, and I try to pay attention to God putting a stop to me, or a brother running me down to say I’m sinning, but otherwise, I go on.

And if you’re trying to follow God, you’ll find that people don’t stop you. God has a way of moving everything out of the way, leaving the path open, and allowing you to blaze a trail …

… while everyone’s frowning at you.

Now, keep in mind, this only works for people who want God’s will. For those that are full of their own opinions and who have no fear of their own self-deceit, I just described a route to self-destruction, heresy, and destructive behavior towards the church that will result in God destroying you.

It’s good to be afraid.

But it’s good to be more afraid of God than you are of people.

That way, you won’t be confused into thinking that just because people frown at you a lot, they won’t give you permission to do anything. Get off your rear end and do something that you’re pretty sure God wants you to do!

First, as a total aside, you have got to read about this bat that lets any scorpion sting it in the face.

God’s creation is marvelous, isn’t it?

A Whole Thesaurus of Bad Manners

I’ve been watching a couple Rob Bell videos tonight. One in particular was an interview conducted by an obnoxious host who either didn’t care about or couldn’t tell the difference between a hard question and a petulant one.

For example, one question was concerning Japan. “Is God all-powerful but not loving, or is he loving but not powerful enough to prevent this disaster.”

Asking once was okay. This was a terrible disaster. Rob Bell gave a somewhat evasive answer; after all, it’s hard to explain why God lets the world be the way the world is.

I’m pretty sure from the rest of the interview that the interviewer thought he was being pointed rather than fatuous when he repeated the question. I thought, there’s two answers to the man’s question:

1. God is both all-powerful and loving. Disasters cause us to question this, but God is also far greater than we are, and the universe and life are really difficult for humans to understand. There are several speculations we could give for why disasters happen, but they’d just be speculations. The fact is, some things are still mysteries to humans.
2. God is both all-powerful and loving, but you’re too stupid to understand it.

That might give him a taste for the difference between being straightforward and being querulous.

Anyway, Rob Bell handled it marvelously well.

Is Rob Bell a Universalist?

The real point of the interview was to harass Rob Bell about his new book, Love Wins and to charge him with universalism.

Rob did a good job of—in so many words—saying that he’s raising questions, not necessarily giving answers. This is the impression that he left Greg Boyd, author of The Myth of a Christian Nation and several other books, with as well. Greg apparently knows Rob Bell and wrote a rebuke of all the people who critiqued Bell before they even read the book.

The host, while carefully maintaining a belligerent polemic, pointed out a couple places where Bell’s book, unlike his interview responses, gave some very clear answers, and they really did sound universalist.

What should we do about this?

Picking the Winning Horse

Let’s establish some parameters here that I think we can all agree on.

1. Jesus is not going to consult Love Wins when he conducts the final judgment.
2. The only way Love Wins could possibly affect the judgment is by getting some people to see how great our God really is, believe in Jesus, obtain his grace, and thus live a holy life.

The real question for me is not whether Rob Bell is a universalist, but whether he is getting people to see how great our God really is, believe in Jesus, obtain his grace, and thus live a holy life … with "holy" being defined by Jesus.

I can’t answer whether he’s doing that with Love Wins because I haven’t read it. I can, however, answer it in general. For example, his teaching on being covered in the dust of your rabbi is out of this world. It is so good and so inspiring that it just cannot be ignored.

Even if universalism turns out not to be true, “Covered in the Dust of Your Rabbi” will get us one step closer to everyone being saved!

That’s my opinion, anyway.

Further, I’m pretty sure that the hard-headed, hell-defending, purposely ignorant and sometimes petulant, fatuous, querulous, and belligerent purveyors of the “believe in this version of the atonement and you’ll be saved even if you’re evil” gospel … I’m pretty sure those folks are turning more people away from God than toward him.

Sorry, but mostly they’re making people who are twice as much disciples of hell as they are.

So, if this is a horse race, and the goal is to bring people to repentance (2 Pet. 3:9), then I’m betting on Rob Bell over the fatuous folk.

My Final Judgment on Rob Bell

I don’t really have time to judge Rob Bell, and I highly suspect Jesus wouldn’t pay much attention to my judgment, anyway, except to see how harsh it is so he knows how harshly to judge me.

But I need to have time to judge a couple things so I can determine where to learn from Rob Bell … and where not to. (Kind of like the time I’ve spent learning where to follow and mostly not follow the ignorant—on purpose—and querulant mainstream folks I mentioned above.)

Jesus occasionally accumulated masses of followers. Almost exactly as occasionally, he offended most of them so that they quit following him.

We have to be careful to speak the truth and keep people on the spot. People, in general, are liars and hypocrites. (Yeah, you and me, too, unless you’re making war on that part of you.) The lying and hypocrisy are not always real extensive, but where we don’t have people around us telling us the truth about us (and smiling and loving us at the same time) … well, most of the time we end up hiding some really important problems.

I’ll bet you think I mean internet pornography, drinking, or gambling or something like that.

I don’t. Those are important, too, but you already know about those. No, I mean coldness toward your wife, self-interest, ambition, and worshiping money and comfort by the way you live. I mean no real effort at overcoming the areas where you don’t get along with people, and I mean disinterest in finding out what God wants you to change today.

What does that have to do with Rob Bell?

Chances are, nothing. I happen to be a Christian teacher myself, and I use some of the same methods when I teach, so I’m prone to envying his incredible skill at getting a point across and keeping an audience’s attention. But I have enough of an audience myself to have to warn myself that having an audience doesn’t matter. The truth matters.

My goal has to be to speak the truth, not worry about audience size or audience approval. The real Truth is a being, and he can create his own audience, large or small. When he was on earth it was both, sometimes changing from one to the other quite rapidly. More than once his audience suddenly prepared to kill him!

Rob’s a charmer. Good for him. I’m not ready to follow him in that.

But getting people to be covered in the dust of the Ultimate Rabbi? Now that’s an awesome goal, and Rob Bell will talk you into it.