A friend from church wrote a brief review of The Shack that touches on some key points as to why we should be cautious about this book. Or maybe even disregard it all together. He gave me permission to share this review.
SHACK ATTACK – OR A CALL TO DISCERNMENT?
“Discernment is not simply a matter of telling the difference between what is right and wrong; rather it is the difference between right and almost right.” -Charles Spurgeon
At the encouragement of friends, I recently read The Shack by William P. Young. A national bestseller widely embraced by some churches and many professing Christians, The Shack is a work of fiction that embodies lengthy conversations between the main character, a man named Mack, and three persons who represent a version of the Trinity.
Frankly, I was dismayed at many messages conveyed by The Shack and have been surprised that many of my Christian friends have read the book uncritically, finding it a charming and heart-warming story. Some say that it is unfair to have theological expectations since the book is fiction. However, The Shack is marketed as a spiritually transforming book, and it being received that way by many.
It seems to me that a more critical reading is required of The Shack than a secular work of fiction because the author creates characters that purport to speak as God and to guide Mack on his spiritual journey. The fictional story becomes a device to have characters representing the Godhead explain a particular theology. As believers, our spiritual antennas should be fully deployed when we approach such a book.
In The Shack, God the Father appears to Mack as a large, jovial black woman whom Mack calls “Papa.” The Holy Spirit appears as a small Asian woman, and Jesus appears as a Jewish man. Putting aside gender confusion and the attempt to give human form and voice to the Father and Holy Spirit (“no man hath seen God at any time,” John 1:8), it is critical for the Christian reader to carefully consider the message author Young has those voices bring and to weigh their message in the light of the clear teaching of the Bible. That is to exercise discernment, a requirement – not an option – for Christians.
When we read The Shack with discernment, I submit that we find many distortions and untruths. Consider just a few of the words Young puts in the mouths of his created Trinity (my comments are within the parentheses):
Papa to Mack: “We [the Trinity] have limited ourselves out of respect for you.” (Isn’t this Open Theism – God choosing to limit Himself?)
Jesus: “God, who is the ground of all being, dwells in, around, and through all things . . .” (Isn’t this Pantheism – God in all things?)
Sarayu (Young’s Sanscrit name for the Holy Spirit): “We [the Trinity] carefully respect your choices, so we work within your systems even while we seek to free you from them.” (“Neither are your ways my ways . . . my ways are higher than your ways.” Isaiah 55:8-9. Does God respect man’s choices, or does His Word demand that we repent of our ways and that we enter His narrow way?)
Sarayu: “Both evil and darkness can only be understood in relation to Light and Good; they do not have any actual existence . . . Light and Good actually exist.” (Really? Does the Bible teach that evil has no actual existence? Was the biblical Jesus aware of that when He conversed with Satan in the desert temptation?)
Papa: “I don’t need to punish people for sin Sin is its own punishment, devouring you from the inside. It is not my purpose to punish it; it’s my joy to cure it.” (Certainly there are consequences of our sin which we realize in this life and which impact other people. And certainly God has provided the cure for sin. That “cure” is the penal substitutionary atonement of Christ on the cross. Most certainly there is punishment for sin. Christ suffered the punishment for us. However, the implication of Papa’s statement is that the only punishment for sin is sin’s own punishment in a person’s life. The Bible is clear that punishment for the unredeemed, those who refuse Christ’s atonement, is the sting of spiritual death and eternal separation from God. The Shack makes light work of the cross.)
Young’s Jesus character states that he, Papa, and Sarayu are “indeed submitted to one another and have always been so and always will be . . . . In fact, we [the Trinity] are submitted to you [Mack] in the same way.” (Why, then, did the biblical Jesus submit Himself to the will of His father? Does the Bible teach submission to authority in spiritual and family and secular environments? What do you make of the claim that the Trinity is submitted to us? I believe that Young’s anti-authoritarianism is risky in human terms and that it is blasphemous to attribute such egalitarian sentiments to God.)
When requested by Papa to forgive the murderer of his young daughter, Mack balks. Papa says, “Mack, for you to forgive this man is for you to release him to me and allow me to redeem him.” (So God can only redeem those whom humans have forgiven and have released to God for redemption? The effectiveness of redemption for the unrepentant murderer is to be accomplished with Mack’s participation? Find biblical support for that, my friends!)
Christian, what about this assertion by the Jesus of The Shack? “I am the best way any human can relate to Papa or Sarayu.” (This is a false Jesus. The Jesus Christ of the Bible does not say that He is the best way, He says, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father but by me.” John 14:16. He is not the best way – He is the only way.)
The Shack evidences a low regard for Scripture. When Mack mentions biblical events or concepts, Papa brushes them off and glibly explains how it really is, thus suggesting that the Bible is the work of man, not the divinely inspired work of God. Yet, some argue that The Shack has value in that it demonstrates a loving God of grace who invites man to a relationship. But it does so with grievous distortions about the nature of God, the nature of the Trinity, the authority of God’s Word, God’s hatred of sin, the requirement of repentance, and the nature of conversion and salvation.
My brothers and sisters, even in reading and discussing a work of fiction, we must be prepared to “contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3), and to do so without apology to the world. The Shack may, from its human author’s viewpoint, be in all sincerity intended as an inviting look at a highly relational God, but would you place even a drop of poison in pure water and invite others to drink? As Dr. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, said, The Shack “contains undiluted heresy.” Don’t you and I have a responsibility to be equipped to recognize heresy and to shine the light of truth so that we and others are not deceived?
- Wayne Elliott
p.s. I addressed some of the objections to this review: Is the Shack Only Fiction?
tagged as book review, The Shack in books,Church Issues,Culture,heresy,theology
About the author
Mark is a Christian, husband and father. He is a businessman by day working to support his family while attending seminary in the off hours as he prepares for vocational ministry.
.gif "Enjoying God Through the Final Four Harry Potter Movies")
{ 491 comments… read them below or add one }
← Previous Comments
Next Comments →
Elsie, I’m praying for you as you’ve requested.
Nancy, I’m concerned about your statement that conservatives here ask others to “recognize the authority of the Bible, meaning the authority of their own interpretation of the Bible.” That would seem to imply that you believe these truths are unknowable, thus we cannot distinguish between correct and incorrect interpretations of scripture. Go back to the original post showing biblical problems with the book – are these arguments not provable through scripture?
And remember that the passion many feel here is not just because a fictional novel was biblically inaccurate, but because the Godhead Himself was misrepresented. Folks can call it fiction all they want – the problem is that when a writer portrays Him, he portrays the ultimate Reality, and so he needs to be on target.
I doubt that Mark or any of the others believe an interpration is correct just because it is “theirs”. But they believe that truth IS knowable through God’s word, and through diligent search His children can understand what He has revealed. I hope some can see how strongly and subtly post-modernism had affected the church: We act as if truth is relative, can’t be known, and anyone who says it can is mean and divisive. Consider if Satan can wreak havoc with such a perspective.
I’ll pray for your husband in Kuwait and for your family while he is away.
Mick, I don’t think the book needs our help at publicity. It’s a smash hit.
“look forward to seein’ ya’ in God’s Kingdom where they’ll be no need for critics” – true, because there won’t be misrepresentations of the King of heaven up there.
I like the redneck accent in printed form you accomplished, though. Funny.
Darrin,
I am curious. In the entire book, The Shack, did not one thought/idea/representation please you? In this forum, I have read few, if any, “conservative” Christians admit that pieces of this book were wonderful. On the other hand, many “liberal” Christians have acknowledged that some of its theology seems flawed from their point of view.Yet they spoke to the fact that parts of this fictional book brought them into a closer communion with The Trinity. In a typical conservative manner, the baby is thrown out with the bath water because any acknowlegement of agreement with the opposition means “impurity” and thus needs to be washed away. Although I think this is unfortunate, it doesn’t mean a conservative Christian has more or less of a true understanding of God than I do.
As for your concern that I think Biblical truths are unknowable, your suspicion is both correct and incorrect; Correct in that I believe that Biblical Truth is known in each soul, individually, because that is how God made us. We are not robots. He speaks to us each differently and we are given unique gifts to love Him and His creation and glorify His name; Incorrect, because I also think, as stated in Corinthians, that “For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known.”
The Bible is reflected in the mirror because it is a part of our earthly existence. You will not convince me that what you believe is authoritative or vice-versa, because we both see the Bible dimly in a dark mirror.
Again, I call for one another to worry less about defending Biblical Truths and more about living them. God doesn’t need defending. He’s a big boy with big ideas that eclipse our miniscule understanding of Him. We can help others, as JohnMark did, to see their faith in a different light but we should not expect them to see it exactly as we do because we are all so very small. I love being insignificant…then, all the authority rests in Him.
Thank you for your prayers. Even though we may disagree, I believe that God speaks truly to you and I am honored to receive this blessing.
God bless you and keep you all the days of your life.
Nancy,
I will pray for your family and your husbands safe return home.
Steve,
I hope you realize the reason for my words you just quoted.
All,
Doug Wilson said some good things about The Shack. Though he also went on to say this concerning what he sees as some very alarming problems:
Mark
Elsie,
Your response is refreshing, and your responses to the critics are gracious. You are more mature than you suggest (“toddler”). Nancy may have had a bad day, but some here (both “sides”) can be cleverly demeaning and unnecessarily unkind in order to share their opinion. She was trying to defend you. Our gut reaction is to respond with like tactics.
Don’t leave distraught. Share your heart for others to enjoy. Some will refute but others edified.
All
John Mark said, “How dare people come here and criticize his (Bro Wayne’s)critique…”(read above for context) and for those who keep referring to his original post as backed by Scripture, I’ll say it one more time:
“this original review on the Shack does not touch very many Scriptures (only 4). The arguments are weak using fragments of book quotes (i.e. 1 sentence quote when 10 pages deal with a topic) and partial scripture quotes without exploring the context of either, expressing opinions mixed with interpretation of truths. Not saying he is right or wrong, but not a thorough exegesis of the subject matter.”
Many of these posts disagreeing with bro Wayne are not personal attacks. I hope we know that. Disagreement does not always have to be in the realm of attack, especially amongst family (bro/sis).
If we did not want his views discussed, this certainly is not the forum. Elise views are just as precious as his words, even if we do not agree with either of them.
The “how dare we” comes into play not with simply agreeing or disagreeing with someone, but, as Nancy evidenced in her apology, the words and tactics we choose to use towards those who “dare” to differ with us. We as believers have a choice.
John Mark
Sorry, I don’t fully understand. That is why I am pointing out the original posts lack of Scripture/context–to understand your basis for being so defensive?
And your example of alarming Christians is to show what in connection with the Shack? I hear a man describing a a worship environment in which he is uncomfortable. He is describing it with obvious bias as to how we should worship. Maybe I would be uncomfortable too, I was not there. Learned long ago that my uncomfortableness does not always negate the value of worship. Maybe they were just as excited about the washing capacity of the blood? I do not know. What is the point? What do we gain from another man’s bias?
Is he describing the trinity here or are a you? Again, opinions,instead of scripture.
Steve,
You’ve lost me. Let me re-phrase. Do you understand why I wrote the following?
Mark
If you mean literally what you wrote than yes I understand. I know his (bro Wayne) intentions was to warn saints of “another doctrine” , but good intentions do not mean we are correct.
If you mean something else than I’m lost.
Steve,
I was just writing a like-minded response to what Elsie wrote above my comment in question. It wasn’t really meant as a defensive “how dare you” response. It was more of an illustration.
Mark
Hey all. I told my 21 yr old son about this site, disagreements, differing views, etc. Later I found he had already wrote the following to me hours before our conversation:
“Do not waste your time with talk that has nothing to do with God or is not somehow forwarding Gods purpose. Its often times hard to tell where this stops and starts. God is the one who can show you. Through spending time with him and listening. Its a hard thing to determine and depending on who you are talking to the rules change. That is why there are no definite rules just God. If you are not following this you could mess some people up. But do not think you will make a huge impact against God because your power in talking to people was never in you. It was God working through you. Remember those people who you talk to also have relationships with God and they should be checking everything you say with God. And the ones who are in a relationship with God will know to not listen to those parts of what you say. SO again you can only do so much against Gods kingdom.
Don’t argue aimlessly. I struggle with this because i enjoy debating people. Its fun. But so is sin. Its only fun to my flesh. Its hard but i must just let that other person win. Its ok. Have you ever had someone argue with you and then tell you something completely unrelated to the argument but you still wouldn’t listen to anything they say no matter what subject. Imagine arguing with someone over dinner table etiquette and then you try and tell them about the eternal life with Jesus Christ. Ha. Much harder. Still possible through God but much harder. Do not argue with people for pointless reasons. It is sinning. Now if someone is wrong that is fine coach them gently. With love. Love only God can bring about. Even your tone of voice can be harsh and that is not good. There is a guy whom i have semi-bible studies with. He is amazingly knowledgeable but when i am wrong he says in a stern voice-that’s incorrect because….. This is a hard pill for me to swallow. He is right but it hinders our relationship because i feel like i should be quiet because i dont want to be wrong. Its ok to be wrong.
Thats why God gives us a spirit to hear him and mentors to guide us. But gently. The same way God does. When you hear Gods voice does he just yell at you immediately when you do something wrong? HEY YOU! THAT WAS NOT WHAT I TOLD YOU TO DO! I SAID GO HERE!!! no. not at all it is a gentle nudging toward the true path. that same love and kindness God shows us we need to show to others. We cant do it though. its not in our human nature. We need to go to God and through God daily to get this skill.”
2 Timothy 2:14-26
An unintended rebuke to me and with that I bid adieu.
John Mark,
Thank you again for your prayers. It makes my heart light to hear that people care when others are going through a trying time. Although my husband is not directly in harm’s way, it is hard to be away from my beloved.
I am grateful for your posting of Mr.Wilson’s words. I disagree with them wholeheartedly, mostly for the reasons Steve already mentioned. BUT, I think I understand why you posted them: You wanted me and others to know that, even though the author is “misguided”, at least his intentions were good. I can respect that opinion because it affords respect to others.
Thank you for the effort to meet on the middle ground even though we may never agree with one another’s theology. It was a small gesture felt greatly in my mind and heart. God bless you and keep you,
Nancy
P.S. Steve–I wish I had had the maturity at 21 that your son possesses now. Surely, this is the fruit of a graceful upbringing, both by his earthly and heavenly parents. Children are certainly a gift from God since they teach us the full meaning of joy and humility.
Steve,
Thanks for sharing the response from your son. I have some questions and comments. First though, I wanted to share with you my recent conversation with a stranger. I even talked theology and Gospel with him as I witnessed to him. Read the story if you like: A Conversation.
How does one spend time with God in such a manner? Through what and/or how do we “listen” to God? What does it mean to listen to God?
God is a God or order which means there are rules and propositions. If we are reasoning based only on ourselves and our own experiences and we come to different conclusions about the same topic one of us is wrong. Hence, God gave us the Bible to which we can go to to settle such differences.
Does he mean here that people themselves will be messed up but not their relationship to God? I’m not clear on what’s being said. Upon what do we test whether or not God is working through someone?
How is this checking done?
How will the ones in a relationship with God know those parts? On what basis?
The arguments here haven’t exactly been aimless, but it is just that through which the “aim” is taking place that is in question. I don’t really enjoy debating people as I once did in the past. For example, my “aim” is to correctly teach my lost relatives who follow Joseph Smith about the Jesus of the Bible and His Gospel of grace. In as much as I enjoy sharing Jesus it hurts me to no end that they reject His Gospel.
SNIP
Again, I don’t believe the reasons here have been pointless.
This is true, but much harder to discern over the internet.
This is unfortunate and someone should correct this person. Either his pastor or someone should approach him with Scripture. Maybe you could give your son this Christian Criticism article and he could use it to approach this man.
While there is truth in the above Jesus also wasn’t as kind “sounding” as we all like to think sometimes. We know the Bible speaks of a righteous anger so we are able to be angry and not sin. Paul and Barnabas had such the disagreement that they split up. Jesus didn’t always have the nicest words for the religious leaders and called Peter “satan.”
I do not doubt that we Christians who disagree about some elements of The Shack are just that, Christians. I don’t dislike anyone for liking the book either. I just believe, as does my pastor (and many pastors), that there is enough in the book to warrant a warning. Thanks for participating here.
Peace to you,
Mark
John Mark
My son wrote this before I even discussed this site with him. It is not a response to you or anyone regarding thoughts about the Shack. He did not even know about it. Please do not take it that way, He sent it via email with other thoughts on a passage in II Timothy. (I think he is working on a message for a college group or something). I took it as a word for ME to heed. Now, I WANT to get in the realm of dissecting every phase of my sons words you just quoted and responded to in your last post, but it’s OK–you win.
But please remember to keep your elbows off the table and chew with your mouth closed.
Steve,
Your son may not have written it for this discussion or for your participation in this discussion, but you applied it to this discussion when you posted it and pronounced it as a “rebuke” to you and bid us adieu. Now you are going to be smarmy and not answer johnMarks questions regards what you took his arguments to mean? johnMark has been nothing but patient with all of the posters (especially patient with me) and you to tell him to “keep his elbows off the table and chew with his mouth closed”
I thought that johnMark’s comments were restrained considering the vacancy of any substance in the arguments that you posted. How does God talk to him? To you? To anyone?
And Nancy, what did you find “mature” about this admonition to his father? Sounds like the cart is before the horse to me. If I said those things to my father he would just smile, shake his head at me and say, “come here son, let me show you what the Bible says.”
Hogwash…that’s what it is. Writing this I realize you are going to come back with the ad hominem. Tell me how rude I am, how “unloving”, etc… Well, they hated my Saviour, why should I expect any better. I am sure that the Judaizers thought that Paul wasn’t very nice either.
ABClay,
I thought it was mature of his son to think, at 21, that arguing for the sake of argument is an unwise endeavor. That’s all.
Steve stated clearly that this was an “unintended” rebuke of him. In other words, it was my impression that his son was not being presumptuous, or “putting the cart in front of the ox”. Steve mentioned that his son had written this as an assignment and passed it along. Steve read it and realized that it resonated in his life at that moment. His son had no idea it would have that effect on his father.
My guess is…you read the elbows off the table remark and hit the roof. I understand why that would make you angry. Rudeness abounds on this website. Sometimes it is very difficult to not respond to someone in a like manner (see my apology to John Mark many posts back), especially when you are having a trying day.
I just read, and very much enjoyed, John Mark’s post on giving criticism. (The only thing I would have added to this wonderful list is a gentle reminder that an apology can go a long way if criticism is imprecisely applied.) Perhaps we would all benefit from reading and digesting this wise post.
ACCOUNTABLE FOR MY POSTS
ABclay, Whoa bro…
As John mark said earlier it is hard to discern tone (and other things like humor) on theses internet posts.
My sons email spoke to me and stopped me. (I was wanting to engage in a back and forth with John Mark.) I posted it to explain that primarily.
Abclay, I left out scripture references my son alluded to in his email and I edited out 2/3 content. So that may have helped you if I would have posted it all.
And your remark “the vacancy of any substance in the arguments you posted”:
It is funny, but WE ALL think our arguments have substance and the other guys doesn’t. This is our subjective nature rearing its head.
ABclay, I have tried to go toe to toe, criticism by criticism, demand scripture, etc… EVERYBODY’S STILL GOT THEIR OWN OPINION in the end. Darrin probably does the best job of making peace and loving the other and closing down the arguing. I, like my son said, love the debate–I’m ready to give people a street corner and say lets meet there and settle this–I’m wanting to prove you wrong and I want others to see it. To that unedifying heart (mine), bro, I bid adieu.
ABclay, if my son’s words speak to you or others regarding our rants ok. If not then fine. I do not think every word of it was intended for this kind of forum, I do not know everybody’s heart, but I know mine.
As for the “you win” and the table manner reference, read my sons “entry” and you will understand my attempt at humor. If you find this offensive (or John Mark) I am sorry and I guess a good example why we oft get misunderstood in this venue.
ABclay, my sons words were not an intended admonition or rebuke. He wrote this without our having any prior discussion about this site. He was up late enjoying fellowship with God and wrote ideas down. He sent much of it via email to share his enjoyment with me. UNKNOWING to him it rebuked me/ spoke to me. But I would gladly count it an honor to welcome any admonition from my son. (sorry to all for the in depth explanation).
ABclay, he is maturing. If you would have seen him less than 2 years ago you’d know it. Now he is spending time with the Lord (that includes the Word) till 2am and emailing me his unedited thoughts (i.e. his post). He is immersed in college ministry at NAU and is preparing to go to Africa for a 1 year mission trip.
(Thanks for your words Nancy. Bless your husband.)
John Mark your response was kind and I just wanted you to know why my son sent it. Yes I posted it, but was not primarily applying it to the general nature of this site. (I was not trying to say this site is wrong by posting it), but as a message for each individual heart (me first) to consider about their words and motives.
Whew!
For those who have gone through some terrible things and have been angry at God this is a great read. Forget about Theology and all the other stuff. When it really gets down to it does all of that really matter anyway?
Angie,
You wrote:
I beg you Angie, Reconsider. For when it really gets down to it, what we believe about God is the only thing that really does matter.
abclay
All kinds of alarms started going off when Mack met the ‘Trinity’ and they started talking. The dung started piling a little too high. I decided to see if Reviewers got the same negative feelings about the book.
Angie
Agree with your initial response (“For those who have gone through some terrible things and have been angry at God this is a great read”), but the study of God need not be discarded to still come to your conclusion.
RUT
Respect your conclusion. All reviewers who agree with you come from the same bias, and bias abounds. Are those alarms your bias or your spirit.
Re
“L”
Regards your comment to Rut, are you suggesting that all opinions are equally valid and should be taken with the same weight regardless of their bias?
Should I go to Christopher Hitchens to get a review of the Gospel of Matthew?
For what it’s worth I believe this book has been almost universally rebuked for its false teachings by everyone who holds an “Orthodox Christian” bias.
How can it be helpful for someone to be presented with a nice story about a false god when they are angry at the God? I haven’t figured that one out.
Regards your comment to Rut, are you suggesting that all opinions are equally valid and should be taken with the same weight regardless of their bias?(I’m saying bias is just that, “bias” does not make it truth because you believe something strongly. It gets in the realm of opinion. I’m saying the alarms going off may be his deep opinions that are reinforced by another reviewers opinion. The alarms could be of the Lord. It is good for all of us to consider what source we are coming from before we settle on a particular matter.
Should I go to Christopher Hitchens to get a review of the Gospel of Matthew? (what?! come on!!)
For what it’s worth I believe this book has been almost universally rebuked for its false teachings by everyone who holds an “Orthodox Christian” bias. (There are many dear saints of God who will be glorious received into His presence who hold a differing review other than yours or mine. We all will just have to stay in our respective heavenly corners
)
How can it be helpful for someone to be presented with a nice story about a false god when they are angry at the God? I haven’t figured that one out. (That’s because your view, bias blocks any value this book could have. Obviously you have strong opinions and disagree. Respect them, you, would hope we could fellowship warmly on those things which all believers share–Our Christ.
“Respect them, you would hope we could fellowship warmly on those things which all believers share–Our Christ.”
Question is, is it our christ or The Christ? If our faith is not in the Christ of the Bible as He defines Himself, then is it Christianity?
Much of what flies under the banner of Christ has little to do with the biblical Jesus. Yet we’re too lazy and proud to find out Who He Is.
PS – Methinks I blogged too rashly: That wasn’t intended as a condemnation of “L” or anyone else here in particular – just an observation about our fleshly tendencies, myself included. But praise God for His transforming power and grace!
DARRIN
“Question is, is it our christ or The Christ?”
The one and only, Son of the living God. However there are many who search the Scriptures but do not know Him.
I do not know for sure if abclay knows THE Lord or not: His words are sharp but seems to be sincere. Assumed He is of Christ. therefore I referred to CHRIST as Ours in the hope of fellowship.
Not sure if you are(A CHRISTIAN), but if you are…I tell you I am as well.
In Christ we have a oneness that will break down all barriers (even differing views on the Shack)–thus we can have warm fellowship. The cross makes it possible.
I Trust The Christ is Our Christ.
L
that’s a fair criticism and correct assessment. I should learn to express my words “less sharp”.
I concur with Darrin. The Jehovah’s witness claim Christ as well. Theirs is not the same Christ.
To truly know Christ, you must know about The Christ, should you not?
I have thought about that last statement a bit while brushing the chompers and I must retract it.
I just want to say something…First, I loved the book b/c I have a personality and learning style that is very visual and I love to read stories. However, it amazes me that a work of FICTION can bring such dissension between followers and lovers of our Lord, Jesus Christ. This book is not meant to be the Bible, it is meant to be a fictional story, just like C.S. Lewis’ Chronicles of Narnia and the Screwtape Letters and any other fictional book written by a fellow believer. I feel like God’s children have blown this way out of the water. We need to concentrate on loving each other and telling others about Jesus Christ and the greatest sacrifice ever made for humanity. And quit wasting all of our time arguing over a book that isn’t even real. Go and tell…don’t dwell on this book because it won’t even matter in the end, what matters is the love story God has written us, the Bible and the story of our beloved, Jesus Christ.
Point taken Elaina
And brothers in Christ thank you for your words
Mark,
Have you seen this one?
http://voiceofthesheep.wordpress.com/2009/03/10/the-author-of-the-shack-denies-substitutionary-atonement/
Darrin,
I listened to this today. I have a post pending about it when I get a little more time.
It is unbelievable that his answers are so inconsistent. He sounds like he’s on the edge of universalism, yet says he doesn’t know.
Sad,
Mark
It is so good to hear from a real warrior for Christ. I am in the christian retail business and am very leary of such books that create a “sensation” and even the world likes them and can even relate to it. People almost daily ask my opinion of “The Shack” and I do not feel comfortable even selling it. There’s alot of “christian” things I don’t care for if you know what I mean. The preacher in me does many times speak, and I do miss sales, but we will all will answer to God the FATHER one day not God the mother. JESUS IS LORD!!!!!
Amen, Jerry.
Your words about “sensation” and “christian” (little c) are right on target.
Keep following the scriptures and your conscience, brother, and resist the temptation to compromise.
I know an easy profit must be hard to resist, but really, as you showed, what does it “profit” in the end?
Be encouraged.
Jerry, thanks for stopping by. I’m sad that I have to agree with you. The $hack is even being sold by the SBC’s LifeWay, but with a disclaimer.
Makes you think, “Huh?”
Mark
Indeed, this book is very alarming and more people are being misled by the wrong theology of this book. I have a friend who just read it and seems so excited about the book. May I post your review in my blog to warn others too? Thanks!
Mildred,
Thanks for stopping by. I’m glad the review was helpful.
Sure, you may post the review on your site, but please include this blog as your source. I would appreciate it.
Mark
I’ve read through most of the comments about the book “The Shack” and I must say that what I find overwhelmingly positive and good in it all is that people are talking about God. Sometimes it takes something out of the ordinary to get the conversation going. We become sedentary in our ways and I do believe for myself, that God is not sitting on a throne with his one best seller “The Bible” and not finding ways to communicate to his children. Just as the world has grown, I’m sure God has watched and found ways to remind us all of his never-ending love for us. Whether that be through miracles or a simple story written by a common man. Don’t lose the forrest for the trees, God Loves Us!!! I for one in the craziness of this world welcome that blessed message in whatever form it shows up. Bless you all!!
It seems so silly that people being so nit-picky on the details of the book. By this, all of you who are criticizing the book is implying that William Young has an underlying alterior motive that is not of God. If this is really true, I cannot condone the book. But, judging from some of the interviews I’ve read with him, it does not seem to be the case. It seem like he has an authentic love for God and wants to share it in his own words. We shouldn’t be so judgemental on such a thing that is of semantics. The bible says in Matthew 7:3 “why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?” If the author is being true and honest and his intentions are pure, whay are we being so repremanding? If it leade peopls th Christ, applaud the effort.
The lase sentence in my last post should read: If it leads people to Christ, applaud the effort. Sorry, keyboard problems.
I would just like to point out that in the book Young (beginning on page 133) offers the point that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil allowed the human race to decide for themselves what is right and what is wrong. Therefore, our opinions on what is right and wrong are subjective, since we individually deem what is good, and what is evil. Sarayu, the spirit, goes on to say that “And if there is no reality of good that is absolute, then you have lost any basis for judging. It is just language, and one might as well exchange the word good for the word evil.
Basically, you all have you’re own opinions, but whose to say who is right and who is wrong. Young makes good points, but keep in mind the book is fictitious and not all of these points are valid.
Kaity,
It seems like you just referenced The Shack as a type of authority concerning good, evil and opinions. Then, you finish telling us that the book in only fiction.
I’m not sure what you’re saying. Can you help?
Mark
I went to the shack website. It seems the story is true,but it’s fiction? The things in the story never happened. but they did. HuH? True fiction I get it!!
If you want to read fiction, find something that is fiction.Claims to be fiction and just entertains.
If you want to read Gods truths get the Bible.
It is just dangerous to mix the two.
Oh yeah one more thing. For all of you relying on your freewill to do the right thing and choose Jesus. Freewill didn’t work out too good for Adam and Eve to choose the right path.
Since we are now born in sin, has it somehow gotten better? Our ability to choose?
Left to sinfull freewill I think you fail everytime.
I am thankfull that it is not left up to me, but with Gods direction/intervention I can choose to serve Jesus.
We know for fact only a few things about the inception of freewill from the Bible:
1. God is all-powerful and all-knowing.
2. Humans are not.
3. God planted two trees in the garden, not one. He insisted that we not eat of one or have any use of it even though it was in plain sight.
Now, we can speculate till we are blue in the face about why God would devise such a garden. Why would He put something in plain sight that He never intended for us to use?
This is where personal Truths come into play. I can devise a story that says God always knew that we would choose freewill and thus created it for us to be in a deeper relationship with Him or I can say that puny humans thwarted God’s ultimate plan for us to be mindless, obedient creatures and now we are all paying the price. I am sure there are other scenarios people can create to fill in/out this mystery.
Everyone who studies God wants to fill in the mystery according to his/her culture. This is called fiction. Some of this fiction can be Truth and some of it can be a lie. In the presence of a mystery, it is up to every individual to decide. I believe that if God wanted complete control over our minds, he would not have spoken in parables, he would not have created mysteries. This is my fiction and I believe it’s Truth. If you don’t, so be it. Perhaps God has a different fruit for you to eat.
Sure, The Shack may be “dangerous” to some and although I disagree, I understand their reasoning. But in the face of a mystery, their reasoning is also fiction. It might be true (Truth). It might not be (sinful freewill).
It has disturbed me that the learned contributors on this site have called for censorship of this book. You have the right to disagree with the author and to publish those disagreements. You have no right to insist that it not be sold in certain stores or that it should come with a warning for discernment.
If you do, then a warning should be put on this site as well because it is fiction and could indeed be perceived as “dangerous” to many readers. (Personally, I disagree with the majority of what is printed here but I have learned some things, too. Some ideas are “dangerous” to me but I have “discerned” some truths without the benefit of a warning.)
In the end, readers should decide for themselves how the mysterious silences should be filled in. Don’t allow someone to dissuade you from using the mind God gave you.
I’m sorry but this book was good. It’s not to be taken as Gospel as some of you think, but it’s a way to look at God and seek a more personal relationship with Him. (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) An example used is a Man… He is a father, husband, and worker. Same person…just like Father, Son, Holy Spirit. Mack has a relationship with all 3 characters, but they all know the same thing.I would encourage people to read this book. Well written Mr. Young
Simplemann, God loves the sinner but hates the sin. You should know this. How can you condemn people who don’t know God YET?? You’re saying God only loves repentent sinners? If He didn’t love the rest, why would He send us into the world to lead them to Him. Seems your religion has clouded your judgement. Any way, you’re no one to judge. God is the judge of us all.
Rusman66, I appreciate your thoughts.
Nancy, anything that requires speculation is not an essential of the faith. It is God’s revelation through the Word that is critical. “Personal Truths” should never have a big T. They can be quite misleading, but thankfully God has given His Word to test them. In The Shack there is not just “speculation”, there is blatant contradiction to the Bible concerning who God is, His relationship with man, and what Christ has accomplished. If you would rather criticize us than the book, then I’m sorry for you. Seriously.
“You have no right to insist that it not be sold in certain stores or that it should come with a warning for discernment.” Sure they do. In fact they may fail God if they don’t. “If you do, then a warning should be put on this site as well …” Difference is, if Mark misrepresents God or biblical truth in any way, I’m sure he wants to know about it, unlike The Shack fans, apparently. And no, I think it is foolish and unsubstantiated to call this blog fiction. What I’ve observed is based on solid biblical Truth. (There’s your big T.) If Mark or we fail in our interpretations, explain where and how.
“Perhaps God has a different fruit for you to eat.” … “readers should decide for themselves how the mysterious silences should be filled in. Don’t allow someone to dissuade you from using the mind God gave you.” Be careful your advice doesn’t come close to that of the serpent. And as Rus pointed out, that was even before the Fall. Surely you agree with the Bible that our minds are “darkened”, and only have light when they are brought into conformity with the “mind of Christ”. Or are you suggesting that those who stick with scriptural truths don’t adequately use their minds? That would be a strong accusation. You may not care for conformity much, but I hope the conformity we are to have in Christ is OK with you. Otherwise heaven might not be very appealing. I believe that care to understand and closely follow the scriptures takes significantly more mental effort and accuity than imagining along with a silly novel like The Shack.
Jesse, “Any way, you’re no one to judge.” That sounded judgmental to me.
Darrin, are you the same Darrin who thanked me for calling him a “shining example of someone who loves God with all his heart and mind”? If so, I still mean what I said.
I have been reading your responses for quite sometime and even though I rarely agree with them, I know that you are that example. I have no proof of this…I just feel it. It’s my “personal truth”–I could be right and I could be wrong. Only you, the writer, knows for sure.
But my faith in your faith is grounded in The Truth.
I did not mean to imply that those who “stick to scriptural truths” are not using their minds. Quite the opposite. I have seen very well argued points by you, ABClay and John Mark. They rarely persuade me to your viewpoint, not because they are flawed, but because they do not represent my relationship with God. (For example, I can recognize that another couple’s marriage is sound even thought they relate to one another in a wholly foreign way than my own husband and I do.)
You have taught me to see the “other side” and I appreciate it and respect it. I am convinced more than ever that God speaks the same Truth to all his children but sometimes in a very different language or dialect. That’s biblically proven AND it’s common sense.
It deeply grieves me that I risk being lumped into the role of the serpent for asking people to use their minds (as well as their hearts) to know and love God. It also depresses me that I think that I have expressed some decent points, too, and they have never been addressed unless they were praising a specific poster. I think that’s because of the “baby and the bathwater” effect I had mentioned in a previous post. If you agree with anything I believe about God, you risk eternal damnation. You think that you will “fail” God by not throwing the baby out with the dirty bath water.
I humbly ask you to consider the following questions: Might you be “failing” God in a more basic way? Perhaps your refusal to acknowledge His other children’s understanding of and passionate love for Him might be denying Him as well?
In the end, no matter what I say, no matter how inspired my love for God and His creation is, you are apt to see only my own feeble efforts to understand Him as a failure to God. Or worse, serpentlike.
I wish it weren’t so. But wishing is one-sided. Even though I am willing to learn from you, if you aren’t from me, than there is no point in dialogue. We will just continue beating that poor dead horse when we could have been admiring its beauty while it was still alive.
I guess we had better give it a rest. Before we can’t recognize that it was ever a gorgeous, living horse.
God bless you all and keep you.
For those of you who didn’t like my review of the book, and made my comments seem something different than they were. Thank You…! I still like the book. It leaves people with more loving god image, more so than the beastly image you get from most judgmental, condemning, self righteous churches who interpret the bible, from the “doctrines of men.”
GOD IS LOVE…., I experienced this during a near death
experience, It is beyond what our language can express.
He Loves everyone, and he is not mad at anyone…!
And that’s all I am going to say about that…!
Quote: Forest Gump.
Hi Bryce,
You say The Shack leaves people with more loving god image and that the contrary position comes from “doctrines of men.” Where would you say the image of God found within The Shack, a work of fiction, comes from?
Also, how do you know that your position that GOD IS LOVE… is not a doctrine of men?
Thanks,
Mark
Nancy,
Yes, I’m the same Darrin.
I TOLD you I didn’t deserve it!
I’m sorry I offended you, especially if I unintentionally implied that you don’t know the Lord or that nothing you write is valid or beneficial. That would not be accurate nor helpful.
I’m failing God fairly consistently, but have hopes of doing better, by His power and grace.
Grace, peace, and truth to you and yours.
← Previous Comments
Next Comments →
{ 13 trackbacks }