Know What You Believe by Paul E. Little

A friend lent me this book not too long ago and after reading it I would like to call attention to some details I find awfully misguided. Please keep an open mind and remember that all of this is my opinion and I in no way claim to teach doctrine. I pray that God guide me in my research and meditation and will help me share them with others.

Chapter 1: The Bible
I like much of the stuff Paul says giving us some idea of the bible through history, but I think he might have over simplified some things. He says that the original Bible has been protected and kept perfect since its conception (p. 15.) Which one is the original? Probably take out the Apocrypha, and what of the debate on books in the New Testament? Then once we’ve figured out which ‘original’ Mr. Little is referring to, we all need to learn Greek so we can read the original original, because as we know, much is lost (intentionally or not) in translation. He goes on to tell us that the New Testament as we know it today was set in 367 AD by Athanasius’ 39th Paschal Letter. So this New Testament that took 100 years to write (P.12) wasn’t considered canon for another 150-200 years? Why’s that? What else was out there? Who’s this Athanasius?

On interpreting the Bible (p. 18) he says many good things, namely, “Statements lifted out of their context can become entirely distorted, even delving into unbiblical doctrines.” His example is absurd, but the statement is true. Much of what Little says here can be and should be summed up by saying open your heart to God and he will interpret it for you. To me, this is key. The bible was written so long ago and so much is misunderstood that we need to step back from the words and just be open to something beyond them.

Chapter 2: God
I disagree greatly with some things Little says here on God. I am not alone in my beliefs, but I am certainly in the minority. One of my greatest problems is that Little says God has a moral code (p. 27) and that God is a person (p. 29.) He of course uses the timeless “God made us in his image.” So what you’re telling me is that God looked in the mirror and made a figure that looked like him. I have some major issues here. One, does no one else find this to be an extremely arrogant claim to superiority? I cannot fathom God being a person, even an all powerful super person. God is above everything. If we put him in human form and give him a moral code and such, we have put him into this nice box that makes us feel more comfortable with ‘God.’ But is this really God? I don’t think so and you may disagree, but for me God cannot be a person because he is beyond such limits.

Little also tries to explain God’s love and says that Jesus is the ultimate expression of his love (p.32.) It would seem to me that Jesus taught God’s ultimate expression of love and that is everlasting forgiveness. God has unconditional love and that is key to any ministry. To say that Jesus is the only way to God we put a condition on the love God has. Why must we do this? I believe as humans we have been shaped into believing nothing is simply free. Everything has its consequence, price, effect. But what if God isn’t like that. What if in fact God loves us no matter what and even turning away from him is forgiven in the end. This is unconditional love and this is what I think God is all about.

Chapter 3: Jesus Christ
My personal spiritual journey is at odds with the man Jesus Christ mainly because he is the condition applied, at least in Christian doctrine, to God’s unconditional love. He is the payment; the substitute; the sacrifice necessary for the forgiveness of sins. I feel like Jesus was a miracle that awakened many to God’s unconditional love, but somewhere the importance of believing in him became more important than believing in love itself. As Little says on page 42, “Jesus Christ was God fully.” But why do Christians ask you to accept Jesus? Why can’t we just ask for belief in God? Interestingly Little says, “He was named ‘Jesus’ the Greek form of Joshua, meaning ‘God Saves,’” (p.42.) So really shouldn’t we ask that all you believe is that God saves?

Little stresses the necessity of Jesus repeatedly. Jesus changed the world greatly and no doubt the doctrines of the New Testament have shaped everything in the world. I have no problem accepting that God came down and offered new guidelines to live by even setting them himself through Jesus, but why would he slap the requirement of believing in his earthly equivalent as savoir to the admission ticket for heaven? Didn’t the resurrection show that Jesus is the savoir, you ask. Jesus said believe in me, or, as his name translates, ‘God saves’ and you too will be resurrected to eternal life. Maybe your saying yes, but you must still believe Jesus is the savoir and I ask why? Little says Jesus is the mediator for us before God (p. 53.) I feel strongly that judgment is a human idea, and God is above judging why then do we need such a mediator?

Chapter 4: Jesus Christ’s Death
Much of my comments in chapter 3’s discussion can be applied here. However, Little says something that catches me: “The animal sacrifices did not save, but faith in what they symbolized did,” (p.59.) So then Jesus’ sacrifice does not save us, but belief that God saves does… I like the sound of that. What I don’t like the sound of is, “It could be said Jesus appeased God’s wrath against evil,” (p. 60.) No! We give God these human attributes, but I can’t accept them. God to me is above anger, jealousy, and hatred. He must be! We don’t deserve to be saved but we are. If payment were required and even if God paid the bill himself, our salvation couldn’t be as amazing. The fact that God invites us to join him in heaven because he loves each and every one of us is the most amazing thing anyone could ever teach us and Jesus did that. If you need the resurrection as ‘payment’ fine, but I don’t think it is or ever was necessary as anything other than an eye-opener.

Chapter 5: Man and Sin
This chapter starts with the idea of God creating Adam in God’s own image. I have spoken on this already, but I would like to quote what Little quotes here, “John Stott sums it up: “Our chief clam to nobility as human beings is that we were made in the image of God,’” (p.70.) I agree with little that Stott sums it up, but our ‘its’ are different. To me Stott proclaims the great egotistical trip that the literal take on man in God’s image gives people. If I go to heaven and God is sitting on a lounge chair sipping some heavenly delight and says to me, “You tried so hard to de-humanize me, why?” I will have to bow my head and say, “Because I thought you were better than that.” I just can’t see it. Furthermore, Little says that man is set apart from other creatures in three ways: self-consciousness, capacity for intelligent reasoning, and moral and spiritual sense. The first two I would say a dog has. I think a dog is pretty aware of itself, and it certainly has capacity for intelligent reasoning. I will concede that my dog has never shown a moral or spiritual sense, but then how would I know if he did? Point is, I think Little is plain wrong on the first two accounts.

On page 78 a little chuckle escaped as I read, “All people are not equally bad, and God knows this very well.” I don’t think there are levels of badness. This seems like a human idea and really requires a subjective stance. God is, at least I believe, objective to all that happens on earth only intervening when he feels the need to send a message.

Chapter 6: The Holy Spirit
Little admits at the beginning of this chapter that the Holy Spirit is the least understood of the Trinity. I honestly haven’t delved into much research on the Holy Spirit. From where I am now, I would say that the Holy Spirit is God in everything. It is what makes the sun rise in the morning, what makes the water flow, what keeps me going on to tomorrow. Little tries again to humanize a part of God by saying that the Holy Spirit has a mind, feelings, and a will (p. 84.) Later he even says the Holy Spirit is a person (p. 94.) I think this is wrong and that all parts of God are beyond this. We speak in terms of their feelings, but it is only because we cannot understand them or express them any other way.

In a fleeting moment Little mentions “unforgivable blasphemy” (p. 85) and this comes straight from the Bible. It is surprising to me that such a statement could come from the Bible, but alas it is there. I can defend my belief in God’s truly unconditional love by saying that the hands that wrote the bible were human and were influenced as such. To some humans, sinning against the Holy Spirit might have been an unforgivable blasphemy, but not to God. For God nothing is unforgivable.

Chapter 7: Salvation
I feel that I have sufficiently explained my beliefs on salvation, but Little continues some commentary that I must question. He says, “For a person to receive Christ as his or her Savoir in faith is in itself evidence he or she has sinned and needs a Savoir,” (p. 99.) The realization that God forgives everything through love is the realization I find in Jesus. Jesus did not teach me that I needed a savior, but just the opposite, that God saves, period. The need for a savoir seems a human invention. I am reminded of Neale Donald Walsch’s comment, “It is religion that has created agnostics.” It is the belief that we need to be saved that creates a need for a savior. I think Jesus teaches we don’t need a savoir because we are all already saved! By what, you ask? That’s the amazing part: we don’t need anything because God is that amazing.

On page 100 comes the blow to a searching soul like myself, “One could not possibly be a Christian without believing the revealed facts about Jesus’ identity.” So I don’t agree with some of the ‘revealed facts’ does that mean I am not a Christian? I believe that God saves, and I believe that love is the key to life in this place and the next, but am I not a Christian? If I am not then so be it, God saves.

The conversation that begins on 103 about individuals selected for Salvation is not a topic I want to delve into because I think it’s ludicrous. One cannot believe God saves if one believes God saves the selected, it just doesn’t follow.

Chapter 8: Angels, Satan, and Demons
This chapter is a bit over the top in my book. The discussion of angel’s physicality, the number of angels, the attributes and hierarchy is all just a bit much. Little did justice to the angels by saying, “The Greek term translated angel literally means ‘messengers.’” The discussion of ‘evil spiritual beings’ also seems a bit off to me. Little says that the Bible proves the devils existence (p. 119) and that existence is not just mere temptation, but actually a physical fallen angel that is the opponent to God. Personally, I think the idea of Satan should be limited to temptation. To say that Satan is an actual being creates a part of existence that God has not forgiven and I don’t believe that exists.


Chapter 9: The Church
I was raised in the Catholic Church and was turned off by much ‘church doctrine.’ I have left the Catholic Church and call myself a non-denominationalist. Since leaving the church I have come to realize that organized religion does not work unless believers never ask questions. The minute people ask questions doctrine is in question and either the church silences the outcry or the church must change its mind about something, neither of which looks good to outside observers.

Little says by AD 60 there were already gatherings in Jesus’ name (p.123.) Where this date comes from Little doesn’t say but I don’t doubt that little ‘churches’ were forming by then. I agree completely with Little when he talks about church being the gathering not the gathering place. This is an important thing to understand and one the Catholic church didn’t send me away with. Another great thing Little stresses is that the little ‘churches’ were considered a sect in Judaism (p. 126.) While we all know Jesus was a Jew, somewhere it gets lost why this matters. Christianity was born within the Jewish tradition not apart from it. This is something that should be taught and is not. Little then takes the time to explain some pillars of organized religion (p. 132.) I think this is also a great section to get a grip on exactly what one is up against with regards to tradition. All in all, I would say chapter 9 is the best part of the book. While, I don’t like organized religion I think it is important to understand it.

Chapter 10: Things to Come
The second coming is a hot topic in every century since Jesus Christ. Little acknowledges that many of the writers of the New Testament expected the second coming to be within their lifetime (p. 140.) This idea that the New Testament writers were apocalyptists is relatively new to me, but the defense is there in the bible. I won’t take the time here to delve into it, but I encourage you to research it.

I would like to say that chapter 10 was as good as chapter 9, but Little makes the claim that when we are resurrected our body is too (p.143) While this isn’t a bad thing, I’ve never heard of it before, and quite frankly think it would be a little silly. Also he makes the claim that, “God is judging men and nations continually,” (p. 146.) I have to disagree. Why would God judge? Again, I have to think he is above such a primitive idea of judging.


If you have followed me this far, I say to you, “WOW and thank you.” Little says that as Christians we should show a ‘charitable sprit’ towards those who have differing opinions than ourselves (p. 105.) I think it is important as a Christian to be constantly seeking God in everything we do and allowing him to be part of everything we do. You probably disagree with something I’ve said above and I ask you to share your opinions with me as it is an important part of growing in faith.



I feel the need to say here that Paul Little’s book is not wrong (who am I to say that anyway,) but I feel his teachings are at least off from what I believe. My writing this is not to disclaim the book, but rather open pieces of it that I can’t accept. This is an act of meditating and in doing so I find flaws in my own logic or deeper meaning in them. We must take the step of reflecting on sermons, books, articles, conversations, est., or we don’t really get the personal effect that is waiting under the surface.


Thank you for taking the time to read my thoughts and I will most certainly take the time to read yours.




-James Parks