like a fire

I have read this book recently and have been amazed by it. On the one hand, the pictures of the Trinity, our path of redemption and the amazing beauty portrayed in the book are overwhelming. On the other hand, the controversy surrounding it is baffling and maybe more interesting than the book itself.

I read the book without trying to break it down theologically. I just read it to experience it. It didn’t hit any of my alarms, which might be a miracle, sense I am pretty critical. Having reflected on it, there are things that I wonder about. For example, there is no mention of Satan. The idea of punishment leads me to believe that, if the book were true, that God never punishes. Yet we have examples all through the Bible, from the flood to God hardening Pharoah’s heart. So while I do see some things I question, I didn’t have any worries about recommending it to others (which I apparently don’t need to do since so many are already reading it).

What I wasn’t expecting was the adamant reaction of others to the book. I have heard claims tat it is anti-church, universalistic, anti-heirarchical, and monarchianistic. I really didn’t think that this book would shake so many trees.

So having thought through the book have decided to read it through again with my magnifier out. I can’t promise that I will see ay more in it than before, but I am going to give it a shot, just to dignify a response to some of the criticism.

I would say that I read the book first as a… book. That is to say, not the Bible or a theological treatise. I kind of hate to ruin it as a book because others want to try to make it something it doesn’t claim to be, but for unity’s sake, here I go.