Crucible of Thought

What's the difference between a powerful testimony, and a sad story that we perceive as condemning the one who experienced it? Often, it's only our dogma. We listen and swing from "that's amazing" to "that's horrible" in moments, based on our preconceptions of how valid that story is. Maybe, though, we can learn quite a bit from people whose stories don't fit our existing framework of understanding.

P.T. Barnum is famously reputed to have said "there's a sucker born every minute." I'd add a modern corollary that says "there's a grifter born every minute to feed those suckers," especially in today's social media world. The recent bridge collapse in Baltimore brought plenty of Barnum's minions out of the woodwork. What can we learn from this?

You can also read this episode at

Is God's salvation truly limited to those with right beliefs? Or is Gal 2:20 better translated as living within the faithfulness of God's son? One puts the burden on us to believe correctly. The other rests in the completed work of Jesus. And that covers everyone, not just those who believe the right things.

This is Part One of a four-part series on the various Christian doctrines of the afterlife. I grew up in an evangelical church environment, and I don’t think it’s possible for any good evangelical to not know all about heaven versus hell, and streets of gold versus fire and brimstone, and to vigorously defend those concepts and then use them to convince people to repent and believe to avoid eternal punishment. But those views are not universal to Christianity, and I just began to realize this in the last couple years. So I’m making these videos to provide some awareness of the alternatives, and to discuss the doctrinal positions which I believe are probably more correct. The following links are referenced in this video. https://theologyintheraw.com/biblical-support-for-annihilation/ https://www.neverthirsty.org/bible-qa/qa-archives/question/what-does-bible-say-about-annihilationism/ https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/essay/hell-as-endless-punishment/ https://afkimel.wordpress.com/2022/06/05/sometimes-eternity-aint-forever-aionios-and-the-universalist-hope-2/ https://tentmaker.org/FAQ/forever_eternity.html https://hebrewwordlessons.com/2019/10/27/sheol-the-grave-gehenna-hades-hell/ https://www.afterlife.co.nz/articles/history-of-hell/ https://exploringthefaith.com/2021/11/16/considering-the-theological-case-for-universal-salvation/ https://www.tentmaker.org/books/InFavorCh20.html The text version of this video, with clickable links and all the Bible references in popup form is available in blog form at https://crucibleofthought.com/a-discussion-of-individual-eschatology-part-1-of-4/

Welcome to the second video podcast episode for Crucible of Thought. You can consider this a bit of an experiment; after about a hundred audio-only episodes, I've decided I'd really like to start interviewing people that have caught my attention and are saying things I'd like to understand further. So this is a sort of warm-up experiment using the technologies I'll need for future interviews. Bethany Alvey, from the Caraid Anam spiritual direction ministry, is a close friend, and we had a discussion about the stages of faith, and deconstructing our dualism and simplicity of faith. We talk here about our own experiences of rethinking and reconstructing our beliefs, and then Bethany shares about her ministry at caraidanam.com

This is the very first video podcast episode for Crucible of Thought. You can consider this a bit of an experiment; after about a hundred audio-only episodes, I've decided I'd really like to start interviewing people that have caught my attention and are saying things I'd like to understand further. So this is a sort of warm-up experiment using the technologies I'll need for future interviews.

So as a sort of practice video podcast, a close friend and I had a discussion about tithing. We both attended the same church for quite a few years, and both stopped attending that same church about the same time, as we both went through a time of rethinking the fundamentals of our faith and doctrines. We talk here about our own experiences in our former evangelical church and its teachings and practices around tithing, and some ways that those were harmful despite claiming to be biblical.

The Bible is full of apparent inconsistencies. What do we do with them, and is it possible that God actually is just fine with an imperfect collection of writings about the relationship between God and mankind? I think so, and here are some thoughts about why that is.

This is Episode 93. Some thoughts on infant baptism and universal salvation. It no longer seems quite as alien an idea as it did when I was steeped in evangelical theology.

I've been thinking about how I can safely and morally join with a church for missional work, even though I find myself fundamentally opposed to joining or building any institutional church. The word that came to me was "partnering," and here are some thoughts.

Those maps showing a shrinking Palestine are widely disputed by Zionism supporters, but there are some major problems with those counter claims. But there's a better way than political or military solutions.

Some kinds of testimony probably do more harm than good. Too often, a story about ourselves comes across as an accusation about the other, and actually harms our witness. We can do better.

Considering Israel and Gaza in light of Isaac and Ishmael, peace is not gained through superior firepower, but superior love.

I've been in an interesting place for a while now, trying to come to grips with a God who turns out to not meet my old expectations, and watching a lot of people who call themselves Christian act rather unlike the Jesus I read about in the Gospels. So I've been thinking hard about the nature of truth, and the nature of the Bible itself.

The Bible portrays a complex, changing view of God. To find the Truth of who God really is, I need to follow the trajectory of God's self-revelation to humanity.

When we learn to release what other people think of our doctrine or politics or God, there's a real joy and freedom. I may be feeling betrayed, but I'm also feeling released and freed.

Betrayal causes a trauma response in humans. Institutions, not just people, can be the source of betrayal. A normal human response to betrayal trauma is to disengage completely from the institution. That's where I am in relation to several institutions I previously trusted and depended on for my identity.

As my religious understanding changes, I'm discovering that so does my language about religion. But to "be all things to all men, so that I may save some," I have to become multilingual - fluently speaking the native language of whatever tribe I am with.

The current trend of avoiding issues by using fear to cause division and boundaries and othering is incredibly problematic: it fundamentally opposes the very first two original purposes of God towards man: being a single unified body made of many individuals, and ruling faithfully over the creation that God gave to us. And that failing is causing deep harm to the Kingdom, by chasing people away from our God.

Did God stop speaking at the end of the first century AD? Did He tell us literally everything we need to know in the Bible? I've been thinking about the various basic approaches to reading and understanding the Bible. It seems to me that there are at least two related methods of Bible interpretation, and their interaction results in some rather different outcomes depending on your assumptions.

What is an enemy? Do we Christians really even HAVE enemies? For that matter, are we supposed to?

Our testimony isn't just for unbelievers. Sometimes it needs to be for our fellow Christians, inviting them to see a different perspective, expanding their existing awareness. And a gentle invitation is so much more effective than a demanding assault on what we see as error.

It's taken a couple years, but I realized this week that I'm completely done with being called an Evangelical and a Republican. I simply cannot abide the toxicity inherent in both labels. Here's some thoughts about why.

Faith perhaps, should be something like a basket of Easter eggs: each one colorful and unique and ornate in its own way, each containing something different and surprising, but all together comprising the totality of Christianity, in the promise offered by Easter Sunday.

Do we as Christians have the moral right to preemptively use deadly force? And do we as Christians have the moral right to kill to defend ourselves or our property? Some thoughts.

Lately I've participated in several discussions about the fundamental nature of the Bible. A frequent refrain is the all-encompassing, totally sufficient, utterly complete, perfect nature of the Bible. But is the Bible truly everything we need to know about God and the universe and history and our lives?

Recently a friend asked me what it felt like to lose so much of my faith. I don't think I lost anything: instead, I feel like I've shed things that weren't mine to begin with. Let me tell you about my own encounter with Aslan.

I've always believed that Christians go to heaven when we die. It's a staple of many people's faith. Where did that doctrine come from, and what does the Bible say about heaven? Join me as I survey the various verses that talk about heaven.

What's more important? Evangelicalism, or Christianity? Lately I've seen a lot of people defending the former at the expense of what I believe is Jesus' example of how we should live as a community of faith.

Jesus said we'd know a tree by its fruit, and perhaps we can also know a doctrine the same way. I grew up with an end-times doctrine that is widespread in the church, but which I now recognize is bearing a lot of bad fruit. Maybe it's time to recognize the harm.

I'm intrigued that for an institution so absolutely central to human life, the Bible has shockingly little information about the ideal marriage. Hardly any of the examples about marriage fit our modern Christian definition of "one man, one woman, for life, with the blessing of the church and the state."

Too many Christians seem obsessed with power and control. But being oppressed was the very thing that helped the early church grow explosively. Are we pursing the wrong thing?

Today's media systems use outrage as a currency to drive engagement. But is outrage a poison pill that is tearing us apart? I suggest there's a better way to exist in this modern social media world.

It's really hard when trusted people change dramatically. For the sake of our faith, often we don't really want to know why they changed. It might require us to change too.

I've seen a lot of conservative Christians recently argue that gays cannot be saved, or cannot be Christian, specifically because of 1 Cor 6:9-10. What does that verse say, and is it relevant?

A Jewish pastor read a sermon written by AI to his congregation, and they thought it was human-written. Can a robot or AI ever replace a human pastor? Perhaps that's the wrong question. Do most Christians today even understand what a pastor is supposed to be?

"Which takes precedence - the Bible or Jesus?" On Twitter, this question has blown up into a rather ugly argument in the last couple days. 

I've watched the dispute, occasionally chipping in here and there myself, but mostly learning from the various viewpoints thrown into the fight. There's a lot to be learned from it. Here are some thoughts about the Bible, and how it relates to Jesus, and who or what we worship.

The point of the gospel is not to get the work done. The point is accurately represent the Father. Jesus' charge in Matt 28:19-20 wasn't colonial; it was to be ambassadors in the fullest sense of the word - to personally BE an extension of the Kingdom and to fully embody Jesus to those around us. That looks a lot different than many approaches to the gospel.

The origins of the Bible are fascinatingly complex, much more than I had understood as a younger believer. Why would God let it be so complex?

Jonah was so opposed to the people of Nineveh that he couldn't abide God's forgiveness of them. There are parallels with evangelical Christians' insistence that God punish people in a fiery hell for all eternity. Is that insistence righteous?

Treating fellow believers with contempt is a sure way to shut down any ability of the Holy Spirit to use each other to grow us up into one Body, one Bride of Christ.

The younger generation of Christians are looking a lot more like Caleb and Joshua than like Moses. They're willing to go at risk with the Lord into a dangerous but bountiful new land. And it's stirring up a lot of anger among the elders.

It's fascinating to look at the topic of "doubt" in Christian publications and web posts. In article after article, there are calls to recognize the incalculable cost of doubting, and the need for unquestioning belief at all costs.

But "doubt" and "unbelief" are most certainly not the same.

So here's my question: How often do we cling to something not because we believe it, but because we can't risk not believing it?

Two websites referenced in this episode: