The Shack Review was created to spark discussion and interaction concerning William P. Young’s recent book The Shack. I invite you to consider both my review of The Shack, and my paper critiquing universal reconciliation. Join the discussion today.
Welcome to the Shack Review
168 Responses
Leave a Comment
April 28th, 2008 at 3:57 am
Here’s my review of The Shack
At first I thought the book promoted universal reconciliation but after further consideration I decided it doesn’t. What it promotes is the view that God is willing to save everyone which is defensible from the Bible.
The book doesn’t guarantee everyone will be saved because it also implies people have choices about whether they turn to God or away from God.
Along with that it clearly implies God is limited by human free-will.
If God is limited by human free-will God cannot guarantee all will be saved.
April 28th, 2008 at 4:02 am
p.s. I didn’t write the above carefully enough - where I said ’saved’ I meant ‘reconciled’.
May 13th, 2008 at 10:03 am
“The Shack” reminds me of “The Beautiful Side of Evil,” a story about a woman’s having come to faith in Christ and realizing that her prior “spiritualism” was based on a lie. Don’t want to say that about PY but there are certain occultic elements in his story that belie the soundness of his faith that are in addition to the pantheism/polytheism he develops. His “dream walking” sounds like “astral projection” to me, never mind that he also totally distorts God’s nature, as if He cannot be both loving and yet hate evil. Evil simply makes him “sad.”
The fact that PY is presented as a “theologian” in one of the endorsements is rather scary.
As to his writing style, “Shack” is good-writing, gone bad by the 5th chapter. The book starts out as a very well written piece, but then as it progresses into the character’s spiritual fantasy it becomes increasingly bad in the way of smarminess, if nothing else. In that way it is like much “christian” fiction and meditational material that would not find a means of publication in the secular market simply because it fails to compete with so many good, consistent secular authors. PY’s has great ability as a writer, as demonstrated in the first five chapters, but whether through laziness or by means of dipping too far into fantasy rather than maintaining his story-telling consistency, his writing integrity unravels. A little less smoking of the polytheistic “great spirit” peace-pipe is in order.
The Shack should not be presented as any sort of theological truth as it fails to line up with Scripture on so many levels.
Is there any level at which the book succeeds? Yes, if one overlooks the mode of arrival, PY’s book does make a straight claim to the necessity of standing in relationship with God as of critical importance. He points out that as a result of the Fall, sin has corrupted mankind’s understanding of right “relationship” so badly that almost all, including Christians, are thoroughly anthropocentric in attempting to build a relationship with God. By that measure we come to the meeting at odds and cannot comprehend His ways when He fails to act in accord with our expectations.
PY’s shortcoming in the book in this area is that He falls victim to precisely that failure. He neglects to articulate that one can find the centrality of meaning, including how we relate to God, in His Word. By that means, guided by the Holy Spirit, we begin to understand that our theological framework or grid must place God above all else including self-deceptions like “Mack’s” fantasy. Our approach to God must be “You” based as in, “What can I do that will honor (glorify, please)YOU today, Lord God?”
Unlike PY’s god, God Almighty does not change His nature or orientation to descend into our fantasy–though He did descend to our humanity–and the way of reaching up to Him is based on the heartfelt understanding of our need to know Him and submit our lives to Him, not mold Him into the image we want Him to take on to suit our daydreams and imaginations.
May 18th, 2008 at 7:33 am
Catherine, I have to say that your judgment of The Shack is a little harsh. The intent of this book was not to “mold Him into the image we want Him to take”, it was the exact opposite. I spent time with Wayne Jacobsen, who collaborated on The Shack, and what I took away from him was that we too often put God in a box. There is only one theological truth and that is the Bible, but God lives in no box and can serve his purposes in any way or form he would like. By criticizing the book as a high from too much of the “great spirit peace pipe” is limiting Gods ability to speak through us. The Shack encourages us to live life with unconditional love, like God has for us, and suggesting that there are “occultic” ideas is only tearing it down. Only God can change peoples lives, not a book, but let us not limit Gods means of change, after all He is God.
May 18th, 2008 at 7:39 pm
Matt,
I have to disagree with you. It is blasphemy and idolatry. God has already told us who and what He is. Fiction or not it is irresponsible of the author to put out a book like this when new Christians can get the wrong idea of God. Also while “God So Loved the World” may give us the idea that His Love is unconditional. We must meet him at his terms under His conditions to be reconciled to Him. That is to recognize ourselves as wretched sinners in need of a Savior. I agree that we shouldn’t limit God, However the author is not presenting that perspective he is outright saying that God would present Himself as someone or something that is not even close to anyway He presented Himself in the Bible. That is like saying that Mormons and Jehovah’s Witness have it write because the Jesus they believe in (not the Jesus of the Bible) is just God presenting Himself in a different way. We as Christians owe God so much more than this kind of story telling. We need sound theology as to not confuse anyone about who God is and how we may be saved.
May 27th, 2008 at 9:11 am
Catherine,
I respect what you are saying. I have to say that the book may have some good points. I think that I, being as scripturally adhering in my thinking as possible, someties forget how awesome the love of Jesus is. With that said, I think it is important to remeber that as followers of Christ, we should not do anything that would make our brothers stumble. I think that this book will make or has made many stumble away from the Rock and Fortress of God’s word. In a time when the Church is strying from holyness, we need to be honest withourselves about the Scriptures as a whole. We need to hang up the picking and choosing. I am not sure that I want to pass this book along. I would rather hand out a Bible.
In my own review of the book, it becomes painfully obvious that this author has a big problem with the Church or religion (or just tradition at least.) When has it become noble to not “believe” in organized religion. The Bible gives us ways to organize, and criteria for pastors, etc. Why is fellowship within a context of worship so bad? If praising God has become routine or “well-intentioned” then we have lost sight of our purpose. Sorry for rambling, but at this point I almost do not know what to think about this book.
June 5th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
I would like to point out that William P Young wrote this book for his children. He did not intend to write a book on theology or the trinity or anything other than his beliefs. He wrote about God as he knows him and has a relationship with him. When people decide for themselves what the author meant they miss it. Sometimes you have to understand that we can disagree on things and still love one another. Do you not realize that he is a human just like us and what others say do affect him to a certain degree? I do not understand how people can say what it is that the author meant without ever asking him. If you have a question go on his site at windrumors.com and ask him. I have heard him speak a few times and he is one of the most humble men I have ever met. He is all about relationship and has no desire to hurt others or alienate anyone.
So after rambling a bit I just want to say that you shouldn’t decide what he means by what he says on your own. Ask the man what he thinks or just listen to him talk. That is all.
June 8th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
This book was a roller coaster. I cried, laughed and worried. But it all made sense in the end. It gave me an undestanding of why evil things happen. I also made me get an understanding of why God dosn’t stop these things from happening. It is a great book and I will pass it on.
June 24th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
I can’t stand it anymore. No one is talking about it. It’s the huge, white elephant in the literary room of this discussion.
In every critique that I read, the reviewer briefly—usually in the span of a line—breezes by the fact that the writing in this book is, frankly, amateurish at best, eye-rollingly awkward at worst.
Granted, I’m only about five chapters into the book, but I’m already tempted to put it down (and probably would except that I paid good money for it, so I ought to at least read it).
So far my greatest grievances with it are Young’s use of tired clichés and verbal evasions.
The clichés more than speak for themselves, reminiscent of any story from any first-time student in any Introduction to Fiction class in any community college anywhere. They’re rookie mistakes that somehow leaked into the professional arena. Well, not so much leaked, as came flooding through the entire text. I’m appalled that any editor let that many slide into publication.
But still, none of those are quite as bad—quite as wince-worthy—as his absolute refusal to man-up in his writing. His gratuitous use of euphemisms like “The Great Sadness” and the constant endearment “Papa” would sound convincing coming out of a six-year-old girl, but just aren’t coming out of a sixty-year-old man. I get that the man’s daughter was brutally killed and that’s tough for anyone—from six to sixty—to deal with, but who talks like that? Your character doesn’t want to talk about it—fine—then as an author don’t talk about it, avoid it, let it sit uncomfortable and unsaid in the subtext. Crush your reader with the unspeakable weight of that grief. Don’t give it a cutesy, overly dramatic, capitalized, italicized name. If anything it completely diminishes any sympathy that your reader would have otherwise felt, since no sixty-year-old man I know would talk that way so how can I as a reader help but feel as if the fictional fourth wall has burst. My storyteller is being unreliable, is telling me an unconvincing story—God as a black woman and his views on the Trinity aside.
And maybe I’m being nit-picky. After all, this story was written for his kids and family and friends and was never meant for such wide, national consumption. Except that it is being read by a broad audience and should have been put through the same rigorous editorial process as any other book before it hit bookstore shelves.
Reviewer say that it’s not that bad, good enough for Christian fiction, as if that’s an excuse. Shouldn’t religious fiction—and, in truth, any niche literature—be held to the same standards as mainstream fiction? If not, how can it ever be expected to be taken seriously outside that small niche? Where would children’s literature be without Harry Potter and his plotable hero’s journey or without the literary grace and genius of the Golden Compass series? We’ve begun to ask more from the authors for our children, shouldn’t Christians demand more from theirs?
You want the brunt of the conversation about this book to be about its religious themes—fine. But to ignore its literary value entirely is to ignore a huge part of what this story is: a story. For the love of God, someone talk about it!
June 25th, 2008 at 8:25 am
So I kept going in the book last night and…I think I understand why so many people are reacting to the portrayal of God as a black woman so strongly—and it’s not for the reason that they think. I don’t think so anyway.
I doubt that many people are that put off by the idea of God as either female or black. Particularly in America, the discussion of race and religion—and gender and religion, for that matter—is hardly a new one. The fact that Jesus was, in fact, Middle Eastern and Jewish is hardly a new realization. Even the idea of God as black or female isn’t exactly new. After all, both Morgan Freeman and Alanis Morisette have played God on screen with little to no real controversy.
So what is it about Young’s choice that makes people so uncomfortable?
I think that it’s because his book is…well, kind of—completely unintentionally and subversively, of course—racist. Now, keeping in mind the song from the Tony Award winning play Avenue Q, it’s true, everyone is a little bit racist and that’s not exactly as bad as it sounds. And despite The Shack’s claims, it seems at least statistically and historically to be intrinsic in the structure of humanity. In order to have an inclusive group—an us—there must always be those excluded—an other (think in terms of Young’s own definition of good and evil; good being “of God” and evil being “without”—same binary idea).
Don’t get me wrong; I don’t think that Young was trying to be racially offensive or patronizing in his book either, but then unintentional, subversive racism never is. But as a white male in a Western country, has he—honestly, now—captured what it means to be colored and female in his portrayal of The Shack’s God? Does the reader ever really—again, honestly—ever really buy the fact that God is a black woman? Or does it feel more like a white, male author trying to write what he thinks a black woman portraying God would sound like through his limited white, male lens?
Through that lens, the holy spirit is personified as an Asian “out-there” (his words, not mine) woman named Sarayu, who’s too exotic and too strange to form any real connection with, making her the least human-like of the Trinity. He can’t even tell the reader what part of Asia her personification comes from (granted because she’s semi-translucent, but these words still seem to echo the old, racist standard of “All you Asians look alike to me”). She is the least fleshed out of the Trinity, getting few if any real emotions or human connections. Again, granted, this is because the holy spirit in and of itself is a less tangible, more lofty notion than either God or Jesus, and that’s hardly Young’s fault or doing. However, then one must ask the question why Young decides an indistinguishably specific Asian, “out there” woman was the best way to portray that being. Does his portrayal echo old (and not so old) ideas of Asians being alien and other and not altogether wholly human rooted more in an intellectually detached mindset than an emotional, relatable connection?
Then there’s God, an unconvincingly Ebonics-speaking, earth-motherly, Aunt Jemima character called “Papa” who never feels honestly black or female. She’s a no-nonsense-speaking black woman full of cheeky “down-home” phrases who hums in the kitchen while she cooks greens. She is a caricature of every seemingly innocuous black female stereotype. Her entire racial identity revolves around talking and acting like a bad black, 70s sitcom mom without any of the underlying racial awareness, tension, or anger.
The fact of the matter is—and this is true of just about all his characters in the book—stripped of these stereotypical moments and character ticks, all their voices sound the same. Underneath every “Sho ‘nuf” (119) and grammatically incorrect use of “is” is just the author’s male, white voice. The core message and phrasing that God uses Jesus uses. The way Jesus explains something looks an awful lot like how Sarayu does. The way Sarayu talks—semantically and word choice-wise—is exactly the way Mack talks. And the way they all talk is, undoubtedly, the way Young himself talks. So, unfairly or not, this means that all these characters, all their speech patterns and contrived actions, are Young and it never feels convincing that anyone else is speaking. None of his characters are believable enough on their own to feel like beings in their own right with their own thoughts and motivations. They are just Young’s mouthpieces. Which, unfortunately, makes it feel as if every attempt at Ebonics—a dialect birthed and built in an often angry and painful culture Young obviously doesn’t understand—is a mockery, a cheap laugh that completely disregards the huge history inherent there.
I think—and I could be wrong—that this is where the true dissatisfaction with Young’s portray lies. It’s in the dishonesty, intended or not, that weighs his characterization down and makes The Shack’s God, in all her forms, uncomfortable. Let’s face it, the idea of blacks and women in positions of power and authority isn’t that shocking anymore. It happens in Western societies the world over nowadays in frequent regularity. The idea that God may sometimes appear as colored, female, or both isn’t that much of a stretch. That God would present him/herself as a mockery of either race or gender is. That is truly disturbing.
The fact is that the author and main character are both white males and can’t ignore or avoid racial history just because they don’t understand it or aren’t comfortable with it. If you chose to have female and/or colored characters, you chose to deal with the repercussions. While I don’t believe that white males can’t or shouldn’t write characters of color or female characters—many have and do with great success—I do think that when they choose to tackle them that they should do so cautiously and consciously aware of the vast, heavy history there. You cannot content yourself to only dwell within the most common, placating, insulting stereotypes. It’s not good writing and it shouldn’t be something, as a person, you should want to put out there into the world.
And, yes, I do understand Young’s intention. By choosing to portray God and the others this way, he was trying to say that race and gender shouldn’t matter. And, admittedly, it’s a nice thought. But, by saying that race and gender really shouldn’t matter, you automatically open yourself to the inarguable fact that—morality aside—they do matter. They make a difference. They alter and affect the way you see yourself and the way others see you and no one, no matter how well-intentioned, can deny that. Not without being less than honest.
July 10th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
I just got finished reading your full review of The Shack. It was a very interesting read. I appreciate your obvious commitment to pursuing and upholding Biblical truth and doctrine.
I belong to a local Portland church called Ethnos (of which two of our elders are currently attending Western), and a week from Friday we are doing a Theology Night on discernment, with The Shack as the case study. Hopefully I’ll be able to use some ideas from your paper to encourage some discussion!
July 13th, 2008 at 11:31 pm
Many of the comments and reviews about “The Shack” remind me of a TV show called “Deep Space Nine.” The main character, Captain Sisko, would occasionally have visions, and they were always based upon the Bajoran religion (from planet Bajor.) The gods would manifest from within the deep, memorable, emotional context of whoever was having the vision. For example, to Sisko, his god was his beautiful, deceased wife, whom he had loved deeply. To greedy Quark, his god was a money miser….
Similar to the make-believe Bajoran religion, many new age thinkers really believe that God meets individuals from within their personal frame of reference, i.e. their fantasy world. So it seems irresponsible, or naive at best, that a Christian author would encourage this.
But reader, how do Christians differ on such important matters and yet live in unity? This is crucial so the world will know that the Father sent Jesus. (John 17:23)
Would you pray about this? Thank you. I will too.
July 31st, 2008 at 11:13 am
I am really impressed that the author of this site would provide links to opposing views to his. This tells me he is not grinding an axe but is geneuinely concerned. I read the book and gave away 30 copies. Hey it’s got some iffy stuff in it but you know what ….. I wept for an hour …. i have never never done that in my life ….. i grew in my understanding of God …. i know it’s a novel but it gave me some mind material to flesh out what the bible doesn ‘t tell us about God. I have 4 kids and the youngest is Missys age - this book touched deep seated fears (of loss) in me as a father … dare i say the Spirit can speak (not only through the Bible) but also secular media - even the works of God’s hand - I dunno - there’s something in it - take it with a ’small’ pinch of salt - be informed of the issues — but let your heart be touched. that’s my 2 cents worth
August 2nd, 2008 at 1:20 am
There is always risk of theological error, but lets consider the likes of C.S. Lewis’s “The Chronicles of Narnia”. It is a book of fiction and should be judged as such. Look at the fruit of the work and judge it on this basis rather than attempting to disect the work as you would a work of non-fiction. As a caution it is important to understand the author’s theological basis and there is no doubt that this will permiate the work. This is clear from the formal reviews on this website.
In summary, treat the as fiction and judge it by it’s fruit. No doubt this work will lead more to God than from Him.
August 2nd, 2008 at 9:03 am
Isn’t the Most High so great as to be beyond the human conception? Isn’t every way of describing God, as male or female, as Hebrew or universal, as personal or transcendent, just the faintest glimpse, through a glass darkly? Isn’t the nature of Christ, as inhabitant of the misguided suffering human world, and yet a being of the being of God, also a great mystery beyond simple statements?
Don’t good Christians seek the worth in many symbols and metaphors for what God is, and what Christ is, knowing that these are insufficient? Didn’t Paul do this? Haven’t faithful Christians and religious writers done this for hundreds of years? Doesn’t your own preacher do this?
Christ himself used parables to open minds and to point at greater truths. Religious fiction such as this book are part of the same tradition.
A faithful person should be grateful for anything that gives opportunity for another view of the Divine, or for anything that helps explain other people’s views of the Divine. Is any one person’s view sufficient? Is your own little piece of dark glass the only one??? I would think it a great blasphemy to say so.
August 9th, 2008 at 9:20 am
One thing that bothers me about “The Shack,” its popularity. Yes, I have read it and it appeals to the emotions but not necessarily to Biblical truth. Soren Kierkegaard observed in the mid eighteenth century, “. . .the larger the crowd, the more probable that that which it praises is folly, and the more improbable that it is truth; and the most improbable of all that it is any eternal truth.” Jesus put it this way, “Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you! For so did their fathers to the false prophets.” (Luke 6:26KJ2000)
So what is our lot as true believers filled with His presence in this world? Jesus said, “If you were of the world, the world would love its own: but because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also.” (John 15:19-20 KJ2000). I think the church and Christians in general have lost their place as shining lights in this world and have accepted a watered down version of Christianity. Kierkegaard observed about the church in his day, “The human race in the course of time has taken the liberty of softening and softening Christianity until at last we have contrived to make it exactly the opposite of what it is in the New Testament…” How much more is it true today? The gospel of Jesus is not what is being pedaled for gain these days (See 2 Corinthians 2:17 - Amplified Version). If it was it would not sell and the hucksters of the humanistic gospel would go broke instead of building great churches and organizations to their own glory as is common today.
Jesus was also skeptical as to what He would find upon His return saying, “And shall not God avenge his own elect, who cry day and night unto him, though he bears long with them? I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man comes, shall he find faith on the earth?” (Luke 18:6-8 KJ2000)
Karl Barth who lived in the last century observed,
“From the standpoint of revelation religion is clearly seen to be a human attempt to anticipate what God in His revelation wills to do and does do. It is the attempted replacement of the divine work by a human manufacture. The divine reality offered and manifested to us in revelation is replaced by a concept of God arbitrarily and willfully evolved by man. ‘Arbitrarily and willfully’ means here by his own means, by his own human insight and constructiveness and energy. Many different images of God can be formed once we have engaged in this undertaking, but their significance is always the same. . . Because it is in grasping, religion is the contradiction of revelation, the concentrated expression of human unbelief, i.e., an attitude and activity that is directly opposed to faith. . . In religion man bolts and bars himself against revelation by providing a substitute, by taking away in advance the very thing which has to be given by God.” (Church Dogmatics - Karl Barth)
I am on an email list where “The Shack” is almost always spoken of in glowing terms, but it is something to consider as a warning when we see popularity of a teaching or a book or we as humans set out to create an image of God in our own likeness,
Michael
August 10th, 2008 at 7:05 pm
I browsed the pages of The Shack and ended up reading about three and a half chapters, plus the ending. Voom! Powerful. Despite some awkward sentencing and obivous theological loopholes, the book is creatively absorbing. Clearly is does not line up one hundred percent with scripture (no book does), but this is why it is FICTION. Does it dishonors God? I think not. Is is leaven and heresy? That is debatable. It simply is what it is. Let the reader beware. An equally intriguing and controversial work is A Step Into Deliverance by T. Pugh. It is a riveting autobiography about a pastor’s amazing journey down the road to the deliverance ministry. It’s a real page-turner
August 15th, 2008 at 8:49 am
I have found all of these reviews quite interesting, my concern with the Shack is that in a day and age where believers are struggling to spend time in the Word of God, they seem to have lots of time to read fiction. The new believers in my life have read this book and declared that they now ‘get’ the Trinity and God, this disturbs me greatly as the only way one can ‘get’ the Trinity and God (which in itself as a growing Christian, I realize more and more how impossible it is to fully know God this side of eternity, He is so vast, His love is so unfathomable, His holiness so inconceivable) is by spending time in His Holy Word, and in His Awesome Beautiful Presence. I know one who has read the book several times to understand God more. This grieves me, why do we look to fiction to understand Who He is? As I read the interpretation of the Trinity it brings me to tears, and so I hope and trust, dear author that you have deeply sought God when writing this book and so I trust Him for you are treading on Holy, Holy ground.
August 17th, 2008 at 8:02 am
My goodness, some of these comments made by such “religious” people are absurd. This book was wonderful! The message is love and trust in God. Thats the bottom line. He is always with us. He came to Mack as a black women simply because Mack couldn’t deal with a “Father” image because of his childhood experiences. That was just the way the author wanted to write it. But even that is not the point, the point is love, do not judge, forgive and trust in the Lord. Some of the biggest hypocrites I have ever met, go to church every Sunday but don’t practice what they have learned there. This book is just a way for the author to express his opinion on how he sees God.
August 22nd, 2008 at 11:01 am
I totally agree with Michele. The bottom line is love and trust in God. Readers need to remember that this is a FICTION book!!!! It sends a great message and even though much of the chapters drift far from the bible I still enjoyed the book. I recommend reading it; everyone has a different take on it…obviously!
August 23rd, 2008 at 9:47 am
Gheez! I had no clue that so many “Christians” could be so judgemental. Take this book for what it is, not for what YOU want it to be. Though this book does not follow the bible word for word, the life lessons are incredible!! It allowed me to think “outside the box”, that’s the point of this story. I’m an African American female and I never for once looked at this story as racist. W.P. Young wants us to see that GOD manifests in all forms, even life experiences. I’m a clinical pyschologist and I will be recommending this book to many of my clients. It puts a face on issues that individuals deal with on a day to day basis. Some of you should lighten up, it’s just FICTION!
August 25th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
Wow I had the book donated to our church library by a church member.
I laughed, cried and was awestruck.
I feel this was written as a novel, not theology, I have been surfing the net in forums and to read some of the childish but hateful things non Christians say about God I want so much to tell them (and have) to read this book.
The biggest thing people bring up is “If God is so loving why do bad things happen”?
I am new to Christ (14 years) and still can read from an unchurched eye and I have to say it told me that God does meet us where we need Him!
Even as another gender and/race.
The character was loving and authoritative.
I think the questions and comments about trusting God, & the judgement of “Religion was just that to have God say He doesn’t care for the “rules of man” but that “everything is about Jesus”!
I loved it as a bridge to reach out to unchurched people.
Mary
August 28th, 2008 at 11:02 pm
Theres nothing wrong with feeling good, and if reading this book makes you feel good and incourages you to get closer to God then it has done its job!!!! I think its not how you become close to God its that you are now and if a fiction book that was wrote for one mans children can bring even one person close to God, my hats off to the author!!! I read the Book and it was awesome and uplifting! Someones always got to look for the down side….
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:59 am
The book was so riveting, I read it in one sitting - something I’ve never done before (and I read alot!). I have been a “born again” Christian for over 30 years. I agree with many reviewers that the book is arguably not 100% scriptually sound ( as some may interpret scripture); but it does not claim to be - it claims to be a NOVEL - like any of the “Chronicles of Narnia” Books by C.S. Lewis - not a spiritual documentary. As a novel, I have never experienced the emotional roller coaster like I experienced while reading this book. I’ll bet I cried through half of it. It is also one of the most spiritually encouraging and uplifting books I have ever read. It’s out-of -he box descriptions of God and His ultimate desire for an intimate, loving, personal relationship with Him made my spirit soar. “Scriptural” or not, I now feel closer to God and more assured of my salvation by His grace than ever before. “Scriptural” or not, the renewed love I feel for God, and His constant presence in the forefront of my mind will udoubtedly have me doing His will (my limited perception of it, at least) seem like unconsiously following my own instincts for some time to come. For those of you who criticize the author’s unorthodox and “unscriptural” style, please get over it; and enjoy the book for its positive message and literary entertainment, if nothing else. Get over your religiosity and get into an intimate relationship with the God who loves you!
September 3rd, 2008 at 2:13 pm
Yes, the Shack may be a novel, but it is about something divine and extremely serious. (Might I add - those who are calling the “religious” and “christian” people judgemental…be careful you are not being the same thing).
I am still reading through the book but immediately when I began reading about the Trinity and how the author humanized each member, huge flags went up in my mind. I think the greatest danger is that people WILL read this because they CAN and it’s EASY and emotionally FUN and ATTRACTIVE. BUT, if this is the “spiritual food” people are eating and can’t get enough of, this is dangerous. I only say this because Why read a book about our God if it isn’t true? Those who like to read know that a book that makes us feel something sticks with us and it’s because we can relate and we even believe it! If you want to believe in God and know who He is - the Bible is the BEST book that does NOT lie.
By all means, read the book, but read it with the Bible next to you so that not only will you be inspired to draw close to God, but you will at the same time draw closer to the REAL God who “is Spirit, and His worshipers must worship Him in Spirit and in truth.” John 4:24
September 4th, 2008 at 8:44 pm
The first time I read “The Shack” I was so offended that it went against Biblical truth that I wrote a 19 page review on it. (And believe me it could have been longer) I never posted it, just sent it to friends and family to warn them. Since so many people loved the book I read it again, thinking that maybe my understanding of the book was incorrect. After reading it the second time I was even more offended. How people can call themselves followers of Christ and then turn their backs on Him and His Words so easily has dumbfounded me.
I have been an avid reader of Christian Fiction for over 25 years. This book is by far the worst and most blasphemous I have ever read.
Red flags go up when people say “it’s only fiction” or “it takes God out of a box”. For starters it’s not only fiction. It’s a thesis on the character and definition of God. If it were just a novel no one would read it because it’s not a good story and it’s poorly written. Remember Jesus used stories to convey Truth and “The Shack” attempts to do the same thing but of course falls very short. Secondly God has never been in a box. People are in a box when they choose to follow religion instead of Jesus Christ. God is way above our ability to to be humanized and placed within the confines of natural thought as William Young tries to do. This, of course, is nothing new. Satan has been preaching this same message for six thousand years.
Young is no doubt an Anarchist and has a great disdain for order and authority. The topic appears quite often throughout the book so the point is not vague or glossed over. His respect for Jacques Ellul confirms this.
Here are a few things you’ll confront when reading The Shack. I’ve made them brief so this won’t take up the rest of your day.
Everyone goes to heaven even if you’re not a follower of Christ. (That alone is enough reason to reject the book)
You do not have to be born-again to have a relationship with Christ.
You can be Mormon, Jehovah Witness, Buddhist, Muslim or whatever. It doesn’t matter to God. He doesn’t want to make anyone a Christian.
The god of The Shack is not the God of The Bible.
Oprha would love it.
God does not want us to serve Him.
God is our servant.
There is no evil. (The book contradicts this at times)
Satan and demons do not exist.
The husband is not the head in marriage.
Hierarchy is man-made and God does not approve.
God does not desire for us to be obedient to Him.
Guilt is bad and does not direct a person to Christ.
Universalists would love it.
Although the Father is always given the male attribute in Scripture, The Shack makes Him female.
Jesus does not live in His glorified state but as fully human.
Wisdom is an actual person.
God does not have a miraculous way to relieve you of your pain.
The Holy Spirit has a body.
The Holy Spirit does not empower us to live holy lives.
Papa (Father God) has scars on his wrists just like Jesus does because He was crucified too.
When Mack started reading the Bible in bed God came and took it from him. (Hmmm?)
Freedom is an incremental process, not immediate.
During an entire weekend with Mack, God never once quoted or referred to Scripture in a positive light.
God does not want us to fully comprehend Him.
The Father did not grieve when Jesus went to the cross.
God is afraid of guns and anti-war. (Throw out the Old Testament).
God is an environmentalist. (Throw out both Testaments, especially the book of Revelation)
The New Jerusalem is not literal even though the Bible gives its measurements.
The Emergent church would fall for this book easily.
God lives in us and we in Him (literally).
God is not to be feared.
God does not find more pleasure in those who love Him then those who do not.
God does not punish or discipline anyone for sin.
God is not a God of wrath.
Jesus is not under the Fathers authority.
God is not a God of order.
We are not in a spiritual battle.
We are to keep our eyes on the present and not on eternity.
Jesus thinks it’s amusing when we curse.
The awesome God of the universe is submissive to us.
We are not called to be like Jesus. He was not intended to be our example.
There is no final judgment.
Sophia (Wisdom) uses human thought to teach that there are no judgments.
Sophia is part of the mystery of the Holy Spirit.
Jesus did not come to build the church.
“Religious folk” don’t understand the Trinity.
We don’t need to ask forgiveness when we sin. Once on the cross was enough.
God is reconciled to the whole earth, even those who don’t believe and/or reject His Lordship.
The Ten Commandments were not given to help us live righteously.
The Law does not point out our sin anymore.
The Commands of God are evil and if used causes man to feel superior.
God does not have any expectations for us therefore He is never displeased with us.
God does not want us to put Him first. (or make Him Lord)
Humans respond to one another in colors.
God “messes” with us.
God does not forget our sins.
No evangelism is required, just relationships.
I think that’s enough. Some of these you may agree with and some you may not. I find these views of God to be unbiblical and not of God. You don’t have to be a great theologian to see this. The Shack feeds on people’s emotions and hurts. It creates a big problem (the murder of a child and the dissatisfaction with organized church) so it can preach a message that sounds and feels good therefore making it easy for the ignorant to fall for it easily. It is not based on Truth. Are there problems in the church today? Of course. But don’t you think God would know that was going to happen when He started the church. All human institutions are flawed because they have people in them. The Shack is not the answer to these problems. Read The Word and find a church that adheres to it. Eventually the dead churches will die off and the living ones will flourish. Eventually we will all stand before the Father and give account, each one individually. Don’t let The Shack be your guide.
I quote Jesus in Matthew 7:13-14 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.”
Do yourself a favor and skip this book. Look at some of my reviews if you’re looking for good Christian fiction. May I suggest “Safely Home” by Randy Alcorn if you want a good book on the church and what God has called us to.
September 5th, 2008 at 11:13 am
Having just this second finished The Shack i must jump to the defence of the Author.
I was dragged up in the sixties in a Roman Catholic school and the fear of God was very very real!
The book has given me a basic understanding of God and also shone a light into the darkness of my sceptisism.
Due to this book i will now actively seek God at every turn in my life.
I feel happier than i have for some years,i too carried “The Great Sadness”,and boy has that weight been lifted.
Fact or Fiction this book has the feelgood factor,so thankyou for the enlightenment Mr Young.
p.s This is the first book i have ever finished reading!
September 6th, 2008 at 12:52 am
Adrian,
I too was raised Catholic. Not just Christmas and Easter but devout. Schools, alter boy, and mass many times a week. I know where you are coming from. Before I became a real Christian I was Biblically ignorant. Once I came to Christ on His terms I was truly set free. What you need is Jesus Christ of the Bible, not the one of The Shack. He will set you free while The Shacks version will only hold you in ignorant bondage. If you don’t have a Bible get one. If you don’t have any money I’ll buy you one. Start reading at the Gospel of John and read to the end. Do yourself a favor and stay away from any books that propose to tell you what the Bible says. Read it yourself and ask the Holy Spirit(not the one in The Shack) to reveal His truth to you. The Catholic church has deceived you… don’t let anyone else do the same.
September 6th, 2008 at 7:28 am
Thanks for your input Steve,i take onboard your comments and will do as you suggest.
However the way the bible was rammed down my throat as a youngster really does worry me,suffice to say that the reading of the bible will always bring out the sceptisism in my charracter.Thanks again.
The Shack has sparked a light within me and that can only be a good thing,it simplified all that i was questioning regarding faith,i felt comfortable reading it(something that the bible never did.)
If the general message is the same i cannot see a problem.
Inner peace is my main aim in life and this book has gone a long way to giving me some belief other than personal achievment.
I do feel that the deeper people dig the murkier the subject becomes.
Having said the above i will give the Bible another go,if things get too heavy i probably will run away again.
September 6th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
I would also like to thank a guy on a website called Askville for pointing me towards this book.
That users name was Eternal Optimist,without that guys reccomendation i would be a less happier person than i am today.Thanks (spenn)
September 7th, 2008 at 5:58 am
Steve,
You seem to love the Bible (inspired by God, written by Man) more than God (not written by Man). Is that not idolatry? I have read the Bible, believe in its Truth. I respect it and use it. I do not believe that it will save me. Only God and I can accomplish that. Ironically, I believe your commentary is more dangerous for new and old Christians than this book could ever be. I am sad for you and all who believe as you do, not because you won’t ultimately be “saved” (I cannot presume to know that), but because you live constantly in fear…which was a major theme in this work of fiction. And the main reason, I imagine, that you did not like it. It must have made you look in the mirror a little too closely to warrant such a backlash. Adrian, please don’t run away from the Bible. Run away from Steve’s Bible.
September 7th, 2008 at 1:08 pm
Steve, I want to thank you for your research and your devotion and love for Truth- REAL truth! Some comments on this blog do not surprise me, as I am aware of the things that are going around in the church movement these days; ie. Emergent Church. It’s scary but it is happening and we can’t ignore it. And praise God that He has always known this will happen - Read 2 Tim 4: 1-8. Men will begin to preach a different Gospel - other than the one preached “of first importance” (1 Cor. 15). Paul says in Galatians that if anyone preaches a gospel other than the Gospel of Jesus Christ (paraphrase), they are to be eternally damned! The Gospel of Christ is of FIRST importance.
I believe that for some people it’s not easy to believe that Jesus was crucified for OUR sins. He was our substitution - without Him there is NO HOPE for us to come to the Father. It is not by works that we are saved but ONLY because of the Grace of the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ who chose to die for us. A well-known verse is from John 14:6 “I am the way, the truth, and the life.” There is no other way. Do you know how hard that is for people to believe???
But Jesus said it and He spoke truth.
You may not like to hear, read, or believe the things that Steve pointed out, but what he found was how the book “The Shack” completely contradicted the Truth of the Bible.
It’s sad that people turn to novels to feel closer to God. It isn’t the Bible. If you want to get close to God - go to HIM. The only thing that is truth in this world is the Word of God (the Bible). These things are not to be taken lightly.
“Love the Lord our God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.” Do you know how to love someone?? You must know them. How do you truly get to know someone?? You must spend time with them. The Word of God is ALL about God. Build a relationship with Him through His Word - it can’t be idolatry if what you worship is God’s word.
1 Peter 4:11
September 7th, 2008 at 5:48 pm
Adrian,
As a Catholic I doubt the Bible was “rammed down your throat.” The problem is is that it’s not taught but used in a way that keeps Catholics ignorant of the things of God. What you had was religion crammed down your throat. Don’t let your past hurts keep you from God’s Word for in them you will find Truth and Life. Outside of the Bible you will only find death and deception. If it’s not the only Truth then there is no truth. All philosophies and religions become acceptable. Everything becomes relevant. Keep in mind the Bible isn’t “positive or negative” it is Truth. Desire to know it even if it doesn’t make you feel happy or fit into your preconceived notions.
It is written in John chapter 1:1-14 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning.
Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.
There came a man who was sent from God; his name was John. He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all men might believe. He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light. The true light that gives light to every man was coming into the world.
He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.
The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
John 6:35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
Seek Him Adrian with a heart that asks Him to show you the Truth and with a mind that wants to know what He says even if it’s not popular (and it’s not).
Nancy,
Thank you for showing your Biblical ignorance and for making judgments on me when you don’t have the slightest idea who I am. The Bible is where Truth if found. Yes it is breathed by God but written THROUGH men, not by them. It is without error. You think my assessment of The Shack is more dangerous then the book itself? I wear that your disdain as a badge of honor.
The book is demonic. One day we will stand before God and give account for what we believe and for what we do with the Truth. I’m looking forward to that day, are you?
James 1:21-25 Therefore lay aside all filthiness and overflow of wickedness, and receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save your souls.
But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves. For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man observing his natural face in a mirror; for he observes himself, goes away, and immediately forgets what kind of man he was. But he who looks into the perfect law of liberty and continues in it, and is not a forgetful hearer but a doer of the work, this one will be blessed in what he does.
Pensive,
Thank you for the encouraging words of love, encouragement and truth. I work for the liberal media and am used to being an outcast and as the END approaches I am even becoming one in the so-called church too. I can live with that though. Jesus is coming back for a remnant and I plan on being on that ship. I will see you there and we’ll have a good laugh.
2 Timothy 3:12-17 Yes, and all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution. But evil men and impostors will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived. But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
September 7th, 2008 at 6:54 pm
Thanks for asking, Steve! Although I enjoy my present life, I look forward to the day when I meet God, after, hopefully, a long life building a relationship with Him. From your insinuation that I might be reluctant to meet my Creator, I assume that you think that I might be afraid of this encounter, mainly because my beliefs aren’t inline with yours. I am not afraid. I have no fear in my relationship with God. It is not a perfect relationship, but it is based in love and commitment to Him and His creation. You and others like you, can use the Bible as a weapon to defend your beliefs, as you have done over and over again in this forum, yet I still will not be afraid. You can call things “demonic” or trot out Bible verses that seem to point to my damnation because I am not inspired by the Word of God in the same way you are, but your passion will still not make me fear you or God. You can not make me afraid, nor make me doubt my love for God, no matter what you say or do. Please know, all you people who may have been hurt in this life and are looking for answers, that your life is worth living through God, but not in fear! Freedom in God means that you are literally free of the evil that surrounds you….you do not give it power to control your life, because God will defend you and show you the way. Everyime. This is His promise. The Almighty, Everlasting God doesn’t need us to use the Bible to defend Him. He wants us to use it to love Him and others with all our hearts and minds.
September 8th, 2008 at 12:59 am
Nancy,
If you are building a life with God outside of His Word then you are deceived and in the end will spend eternity in the Lake of Fire. Sorry but truth is truth. You show great disrespect for God by disrespecting His Word. You and millions of others create your own god in your own image because the one of Scripture doesn’t fit into your world view. From a secular standpoint that is fine but from God’s view it leads to death. Feel free to love The Shack but by excepting it’s god you are rejecting the only one that is real.
You said “Freedom in God means that you are literally free of the evil that surrounds you….you do not give it power to control your life, because God will defend you and show you the way. Every time.” Could you please send me the scripture where you received this from? I would really like to know.
Psalm 111:9-10
He has sent redemption to His people; He has commanded His covenant forever: Holy and awesome is His name.
The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom;A good understanding have all those who do His commandments. His praise endures forever.
Hebrews 4:11-13 Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.
For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.
John 10:1-3 “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door, but climbs up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber. But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the doorkeeper opens, and the sheep hear his voice; and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out.
September 8th, 2008 at 2:20 am
Nice try, but I’m still not afraid of you and your lakes of fire. And I’m still not afraid of God. Or the Bible. I think it is a very telling thing that you Bible Bullies spray scripture like it is gunfire, hoping to make everyone cower in terror. But I won’t cower. I know the Truth and you can’t take it from me. All you can do to those who won’t bend to your will is to escalate your violence, which I am sure you will. Yet, we still will not be afraid. You are not my enemy. You are my neighbor…and as Jesus modeled for all to see and understand…I will try and love God and neighbor with all my heart and all my soul. I don’t need to quote scripture on that…it is everywhere in the Bible and the reason I look to this great book for wisdom and guidance in a world of fear and madness.
September 8th, 2008 at 11:03 am
At the very least I think it behooves believers to take any literature, especially which espouses Christian theology and/or thought, with a grain of salt and discernment; that is, read between the lines. If it’s claptrap, it will become apparent. If it has some worth, it will remain a part of the mainstream, orthodox church as a whole for some time. Consider CS Lewis and Tolkien.
Also, consider the likes of the Prayer of Jabez and The Purpose Driven Life. I think that when a work by any Christian quickly soars to the top and is promoted by Christian and secular media with little critique of the questionable parts, we need to take a step back as a Church and as individual Christians.
I haven’t read the book yet, but from everything I’m reading about it, I’ll be even more discerning if I ever do read it.
I find it quite troubling when Christians latch on to any new major literary work as “the” thing, when they’re more often then not, incomplete and when one ascribes too much to them, easily falls into the heresies that those who’ve critiqued the book point out about the book in the first place.
Too many Christians jumping on bandwagons with little spiritual discernment, wisdom or knowledge.
Be a critical reader, not a gullible one. If a book is merely sating your emotions, especially one that’s discussing a lot of theological points, it’s time to reassess how you’re reading and why.
September 8th, 2008 at 11:59 am
Nancy,
God bless you for your steadfastness and determination to follow a relationship with God. Only our relationships will last for eternity. Our deeds will die with us. Those who live by the law are doomed to be condemned by it. We cannot let people trot out their “proof texts” in an attempt to scare or condemn us. I admittedly did not read “The Shack” with a theologically critical eye, although I intend to re-read it with that mindset. If, when I do so, I find any glaring inconsistencies of salvational importance, I will gladly retract my defense of “The Shack” on this website.
I spend the first moments of every day studying God’s Word. Since reading “The Shack”, I have been reading the Bible with “The Shack” in mind; and I have yet to find anything its context that would make me doubt the blessing I have received from “The Shack”. We must keep in mind that the writers of the Bible were God’s penmen, not His pen. They brought along with them all their baggage and human preconceptions. While I am thoroughly convinced of the Truth of both the Old and New Testament; I constantly keep my mind open to alternative interpretations, because I cannot trust my own judgement. I don’t know if I envy or pity those who are so certain of their own human interpretation of Divine inspiration that they feel obligated to scare others into accepting their views. Why do we as Chrisians insist on shooting our own wounded?
In my feeble attempts at witnessing, I do not feel comfortable in questioning why others interpret God’s Word differently than me; all I can witness to is what God through His Son and His grace have done for me. I constantly pray for enlightenment from the Holy Spirit; and I firmly believe that He led me to “The Shack” to help me “unlearn” some of the confining, legalistic and doctrinal stuff that has been crammed down my throat through several Christian organizations. I refuse to believe in a God that is so remote, weak, and uncaring that He would let Satan step in front of Him to deceive a seeker of truth. I am saved by Jesus Christ and His grace by faith, not by some church and its doctrine through fear and dogmatism. Jesus came to save the lost, which I would definitely be without His grace. “The Shack” has only reinforced my gratitude to Him for this salvation; and by His grace, I am determined to keep His law out of a love relationship rather than earning a legal “right” to salvation. As it states in Romans, “no one is righteous - no not one” (especially me). As a sinner, I take refuge in His frequent statement to sinners - “Your sins are forgiven; go and sin no more”. By His grace, may all who seek an intimate relationship with Him as His bride in the New Earth remain open to the inspiration found in His Holy Word and any other teaching tool His Holy Spirit chooses to use to bring us closer to our heavenly Father. God bless you, Nancy; and keep the faith you have found.
September 8th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
It’s curious. I started reading this comment forum because I had just finished reading The Shack and I wanted to know what other people were thinking, too. I have been accused of “loving” this book, but I never stated this. I started to respond in this forum because I saw someone in apparent spiritual pain, looking for answers, and from my viewpoint, he was getting bullied into accepting only one person’s version of the Truth. For the record, I like this book because it made me stop and think about my relationship with God, which I won’t go into because my life with God is private. But like Trafford, I was and am a bit wary of this book’s popularity. Trafford is right, it’s okay to be inspired by writing, but we must look critically at it as well. In the end, I think it is an imperfect understanding of something that we are incapable of understanding perfectly. Instead of fighting about what the perfect understanding is, I think we should consider how culture creates the lense in which we look at scripture. The Bible verse trotted out in an earlier discussion (to intimidate others) was the passage in John where Jesus speaks in metaphor about being the gatekeeper. Where some people have most probably been raised in a culture of fear or oppression, the Gate (Jesus) serves to keep people out. It excludes those who don’t belong. But gates serve two functions. I and Joemoe were most probably raised in a culture of love and acceptance. Therefore, the Gate is protective. The Gate protects the sheep and even protects sheep “from other folds”. Our Gate includes. Neither interpretation is “right”, just meaningful in different ways to people who were raised in different ways. But my main reason for responding in this forum is to make sure that people know they have a choice! They can build a relationship with God that is based in fear or love. If fear works best for you, that is your business and I will not dare usurp God’s place and judge you. But I am thankful for the JoeMoes out there who love and for the Traffords who remind us to think about where this love comes from. God bless you, lovers of God and lovers of people. You make an enormous difference in this world.
September 8th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
Nancy and JoeMoe,
Your hatred for the truth and God’s Word is so obvious it astounds me. You have created a god in your own image and expect everyone else to adhere to your fairytale. Well I tell you what, it isn’t going to happen. Myself, along with millions of other have chosen to follow Christ on His terms and not our own, even to the point of pain and death. There have been many who have walked the hard, narrow road before me (including 12 of the Apostles who walked with Jesus) and there will be many more. You narrow God down to a God of love but He’s so much more then that. He’s a God of healing, righteousness, jealously, anger, compassion, mercy, grace, discipline, war, vengeance, judgment, wrath and many more. Of course if you remove God’s own Words from your theology then you have the fairytale you’ve made up. You are both lost and confused. Go ahead and say all the mean, hateful things about me. It truly doesn’t bother me. I was raised Catholic and when I came to Christ on His terms I was kicked out of the family. Narrow-minded hatred from you just shows I’m still on the right course.
May God’s Holy Spirit and the blood that was shed for you reach you in your confusion and pain and draw you to a real relationship with Jesus Christ.
September 8th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
Nancy,
And one more thing… I asked you one simple question and you didn’t answer it so I’ll ask it again. You said, and I quote “Freedom in God means that you are literally free of the evil that surrounds you….you do not give it power to control your life, because God will defend you and show you the way. Every time.”
Could you please send me the scripture where you received this from? I would really like to know.
September 8th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
Steve,
I am truly sorry you were banished from your family for your beliefs. That kind of psychological violence is inexcusable and pitiful. And it makes me so terribly sad, I want to weep. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t pity you or feel sorry for you. You obviously felt strongly that your beliefs were and are valid. You took a stand and should be proud that you were following your heart, even if it meant the death of your family as you knew it. I think Jesus would be proud of you because he loved God so that he went to his death to prove the same. I never said “mean and hateful things about you”, in fact I made it clear that I would try and love you as God commanded because you are my neighbor. I am so very sorry if that’s what you felt I did. I called you out on the bullying that you yourself were victim to, too. That type of fearmongering makes me crazy and I had to take a stand against it. Not against you, but against the fear. I also stood up and said, there is more than one side to this story. That is not being mean. But I can see now where your anger comes from. I would be furious too if my family excluded me because they thought my relationship to God was wrong. You are completely correct when you say that God is more than Love. He is…infinity. Words can not describe everything He is and I am in wonder of it, not in fear of it. My point about the Gate was that we can not make any one scripture mean one thing. God is indeed many things, but I choose to be inspired most by His call to love. Yes, your family had a right to their beliefs. But they had no right to force those beliefs on you or others. THAT is wrong. God help them. As for the scriptural reference you would like me to provide, I can not and will not list all the places in the Bible that describe how God loves us, protects us from evil, is our guide in times of trouble–our Rock and salvation in this crazy world. I cannot list all the places that describe that He is with us always even unto death. I would have to quote all four Gospels in full just to start. I know you want me to list a certain passage so you can correct me as you have been corrected by your family. I just won’t do it Steve. You seem to need love, compassion and understanding, not more anger and hurt. God loves you, Steve. Of that I am sure.
September 8th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
Steve,
Forgive me if I have upset you sufficiently to warrant such a harsh rebuke. I can assure you, I do not hate God;s truth; nor do I believe that Nancy does. As I stated in a previous post, I will re-read “The Shack”, comparing it with my understanding of scripture. Jesus said that He wants us to be one with Him as He is one with the Father; and He gave us a command to love one another. Our debate is deviating from the wishes and commands of Jesus. I repent of my pary in bringing division rather than unity; and contention rather than love and understanding. I ask your forgiveness. I am terminating my part in this contentious debate. I will be praying that Jesus will give us both a correct understanding of His nature. I have no problem admitting my error if I am wrong; and I reserve the right to revise my opinions as the Spirit leads me into a better unerstanding. In the mean time, I continue to support those who are blessed by this book. It doesn’t matter which one of is has a better understanding, God loves us both; and offers us both an equal opportunity for His salvation through grace and the sacrifice of His Son. I continue to believe that there is nothing I can do to make God love me more; and nothing I can do to make Him love me less; I can only accept or reject His love. May God bless us both, as well as anyone else who is sufficiently moved by this book to further consider their relationship with God.
September 8th, 2008 at 9:44 pm
You are a fine example of humility and forgiveness JoeMoe. Although I will still stand up and confront injustice, I will try not to allow my frustration with it to make me contentious with a neighbor whose true heart is unknown to me. I have been blessed by God today. He has reminded me again that anger begets anger and no good, and therefore, no God can come of that. I can’t add anymore than what JoeMoe has already said. I can only reiterate: May God bless all of us who seek.
September 12th, 2008 at 6:41 am
I felt that the book’s content wasn’t even worth debate. The only decent review on this website is the one by “A Lover of Literature” who actually reviewed the book for the way in which it was written, or rather the way in which it wasn’t.
September 12th, 2008 at 11:44 pm
I have read the book entireley and while I do agree one must not believe whole-heartedly in it’s content, there are many truths which reach past man created theology and also fit precisely the message Christ desired for us to understand. We live in a generation of churches today with no power, revelation, change, or effect and continue to become defensive when man-made theology is challenged. I do not propose this book as the gospel, but the ideas in the book allow those who have heard the scriptures spoken in a legalistic manner to see the truth. It has revolutionized the way I think about my relationship with God, and I finally have been freed from my anti-authoritative rebellion. It’s interesting to note when Jesus existed upon the earth, the Pharisees whom were the religious leaders of his day, called him a heretic and said he blasphemed the true God. I’m not saying Mr. Young is Christ, but the truths he relates are being attacked with the same fervor.
September 14th, 2008 at 9:50 am
It’s several days since i finished reading the shack and i’m STILL SMILING!
So i say if the Lord created man,then he also created Mr Young,which inturn means he created the thoughts of the author,which inturn means that there is no malice intended in this book,just a hopeful expression of how one man percieves his God.
A beautiful perception at that!
September 16th, 2008 at 11:20 am
Interesting & entertaining take on the trinity for sure..
While I agree with my friends that it’s a fictional writing, not a doctrinal statement, it’s also obvious that the writer takes great pains in detailing his take on theology..placing a sort of burden upon himself to give due diligence to the scriptures..as best as is possible.
I’m not sure why Young chose to be so critical of structures, or why he would have Jesus saying that His desire isn’t that folks “become Christians”.
It seems to me that statement could confuse some people with no church/theological background.
Meaning, why would Jesus NOT want to see folks become Christians?
It is that name by which we’re called(in scripture) by the world in order that we’re identified as followers of Jesus(or so we’re sposed to be)
I don’t entirely get it.
Maybe someone can enlighten me.
I will say this: the portion of the story dealing with Missy’s abduction & subsequent murder had my heart wrenching with emotion for children who suffer likewise.
Rich
September 20th, 2008 at 6:57 pm
I love the book and love your reviews! To me this book was not about information but about “life change”. As far as I read it, I could feel, see and experience the “change” God brought about in my heart, mind, emotions and all of my being and that to me speaks louder than words can. The greatest and hardest truth to accept for me and I suppose others too is the truth that ” I am loved and I am wanted”,by God, allways and all the time. “The Shack” reinforced that specific truth in me as a result I can see and experience the love of God more at work in me and through me, to my wife, kids and others around me. I love more because I know more that I am loved by my Papa! Bless you all and thanks William Young!
September 21st, 2008 at 8:22 pm
I’m not finished with it yet, but I, too, experienced a change. And a wonderful revelation. For many years I have had a hard time defining “love.” The statement that love is “expectancy,” not “expectation” moved me profoundly. I told a friend about the part of the story that led up to that statement and she said, Yes, he’s describing 1 Cor. 13 — love is patient, love is kind, etc., — I didn’t realize that, but the “expectancy, not expectation” statement really moved me.
September 23rd, 2008 at 6:45 pm
Why do I read a book? Often because I am curious. And this time knowing The Shack was being touted as “Christian fiction” actually did make me wary.
I examined the sad cover, read the intro and the author’s comments. Oh, why not! Once begun I kept reading - I love any book that makes me do this! And as I read, I was ever more deeply touched as this father in pain find his way toward healing as God shows up dynamically represented in a variety of persons/spirits. I am still pondering the father’s wild walk with Wisdom’s power and persuasion.
And I WAS surprised as this zigzaggy tale struck a healing cord in my own spirit. I resonated with this illusive - yet ever-present - God who loves and listens, nurtures with food and story, weeps and laughs and nudges toward healing and forgiveness.
Now I simply want others to read this book so we can discuss it! That is all I ask!
But why read it at all? There are so many books… I said I was curious. I am also a lover of many kinds of literature and I found Young’s allegorical bent allowed me to share in the warmth pouring forth from this trio of God perspectives.
It is fun that some of you are especially suspicious of this book BECAUSE it is so popular-?
September 25th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
I am in a book club that selected to read this book. I was aware before reading the book of the controversial contents. I am an avid reader and when I come across a book that is outstanding, I can hardly put it down. The Shack was not one of those books. I did not feel it was well written. I could not relate to Mack. There was very little character development and I felt that while the book begins with a horrific tragedy, the book really did not develop that story line. I realize that the author probably had to pick something that would be gripping, but I found it morbid. I also do not think that the story told much about Mack and his father’s problems again developing Mack’s character. The selection for the characters of the trinity was totally a farce. It was almost laughable to be picturing God as a large black woman called Papa. I was able to get over this, to try to make some sense of it all. But why were all the interactions between Mack and the trinity centered around eating? I never picture God eating or cooking- so this concept seemed ridiculous. The author was able to go into major descriptions around the food they prepared and shared, but again neglecting to be thorough on building the characters. I am sorry to say that this book did not transform me in any way, nor draw me close to God. Rather, I agree with some of the other reviews that it was poorly written and not worth all the hype.
On another note… I feel sad that people get so worked up with their convictions. Really you can agree to disagree without passing judgment. I do feel that Christians need to be careful they are not putting themselves on the thrown in a position of judging others who did find some kind of spiritual revelation in this book. Please let God be the one to use this book in peoples lives as he pleases. Remember who he spent most of his time with while on earth… sinners! We all are sinners, no one is perfect, and no one persons interpretation of scriptures is better than the other. The Bible is truth,but interpretation of the Bible can create a lot of division amongst Christ followers. That is not God’s desire, but rather a result of Satan and his schemes to kill and destroy. Proverbs 3:5-6 says “trust in the lord with all your heart, lean not on your own understanding but in all your ways acknowledge him and he will direct your path”. We will never fully understand everything in God’s word on this side of eternity. I cannot wait the Lord’s return and live by the words of John 16:33 ” in this world you will have trouble, take heart I have overcome the world!”
September 27th, 2008 at 6:32 am
A lady from my book club chose to this book for us to read. I have been a high school English teacher for years. This book is poorly written. There is much emotional content, but little of substance to it. Especially illogical are the author’s arguments. The author is not using inductive or deductive logic to arrive at his conclusions (philosophy). Nor is he using the Bible (theology) to reveal who God is. Rather he has chosen his own path (Is. 53:6) to God and has created a false image to worship - indeed it is a false trinity much like the devil, the beast and the false prophet in the book of Revelation. Sadly those ignorant of the Bible might find it appealing as it takes away all sense of responsibility and realization that there is an inner conscience of right and wrong (also very illogical as it is the Holy Spirit who convicts of sin, guilt and righteousness. Yes we are guilty before God and those feelings of guilt will lead us to confess our sins and have faith in Jesus Christ. Salvation us by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone.
September 29th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
I absolutely loved the book! As a matter of fact, it is the best book I have read and here’s why; it was honest and real. It depict’s someone’s reality and is ultimately a story of God fathering us through the process of healing and forgiveness. Something we all need to work through. Our stories are all different and unique, but I believe the author did an excellent job depicting the one aspect of that process that is universal to us all…God’s grace. Legalism stops short at this point! Legalism is blinding and until that veil is lifted, this book will probably be useless to you as a reader. Instead, it would be yet another miracle of grace if this book was the very tool God uses to lift that veil! I think that is a little more in line with what the author intended. That is what I got out of it. I don’t think in any way this book was intended to be a theological statement!
September 30th, 2008 at 7:21 pm
It never ceases to amaze me. As a growing Christian willing to admit that only God holds all the answers, it is such a blessing to get revelations like I did tonight. I went to a forum last week at local university about the Shack. Our church is hosting a weekly study on the book and a couple of us went to the forum to gain some “outsider” insight to share with the group. A Methodist, Baptist, and Universal Unitarian were the speakers. Without mentioning specifics, two speakers really took the wind out of my sails(I was deeply moved by the book). I have been angry all week at their interpretation(and ready to share that anger with our club in the morning). However, after coming across this blog….I have found peace. The thread between Nancy and Steve is what gave me that peace. They each represented the viewpoint of 2 different speakers at the forum….one that I agreed with and one that I did not. However, the limited time allowed in the forum did not allow the speakers to come to a “mutual understanding or agreement”. Nancy’s absolute willingness to understand that God is working in Steve in His perfect way was clearly an example of what God wants us to achieve. The same opinions that alienated me at the forum and made me angry have been embraced by Nancy in Steve.Although different than her own, these opinions have been accepted as God’s work in Steves heart. This was a revelation to me. Bible quoting fundamentalists have always been a Kingdom wrecker in my mind…taking any hopes of relationship with God out of Christianity with fear. Nancy’s willingness to understand Steve’s approach to his relationship with God is a testament to the True Peacefulness that a relationship with God will provide…..
Rather than going to my 6 a.m. book club spouting disapproval of an interpretation of The Shack,I will now go thanking God for letting me see how it worked in another Christian and to always be aware that God works in us all in different ways. The blessings that have been revealed to me when I open my heart to see His work are endless…..
Lord,
Thank you for drawing me closer to you through this book. Lord, thank you for allowing me to realize that there many seeking your will and your way and please continue to allow me to see their heart and not become a stumbling block by being judgemental of their ways. I pray that you will continue to provide me with opportunities to grow closer in relationship to you and grant me the wisdom and patience to realize when I am encountering your work here on Earth. In your precious son’s name,
Amen
October 4th, 2008 at 8:30 pm
Nancy,
After reading the “Back and Forth” between you and Steve, I have a question for you and I hope you answer it honestly. Would you consider yourself a “Good Person”?
October 6th, 2008 at 5:56 am
Is it really that far off of the Bible? What I took from it is this. God loves me. He loves me so much that he would go to any length to pursue me. Even as far to die on a cross. God is love. This book romanticizes that love. Everything I have read in the bible since I read the shack bleeds that. I see Gods love more in the bible now than I ever have. Yes, it is fiction. But it helped to open my eyes wider to the underlying theme of the Bible. What does the Bible say to me? It says ‘I am especially fond of you Brian.’ I love Jesus. I love God. I love the Holy Spirit. Take the shack for what it is. Take a weekend and read it. Then spend the rest of your life reading the bible and praying with the confidence that our God is not only just, awe inspiring, and fear inspiring, but graceful and loving.
October 12th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
Let me ask you this Brian, Knowing that God would go to any length to pursue you…will you go to any length..(to die to yourself) to pursue HIM?
October 13th, 2008 at 6:23 am
I found the book very enjoying and it drew me to a deeper relationship with G-d. The revelation knowledge that I experienced was spirit quickening, as well as, enlightening. If you are grounded and rooted in the word, then you should have no problem with this book, because it is just fiction. If you know the truth, then the truth shall keep you free of all deception. Also, if you truly know G-d, this book should not distort your view of Him. The author never said that this was a replacement to the Bible. It is a Fiction novel, not non-fiction. Additionally, the author never stated that this book was the core of Christianity or any other religion. I found compassion, brokeness, forgiveness, love, grace, and mercy to abound in this novel. I believe that we all need something or someone to challenge us, during our spiritual walk, and draw us closer to Him. The Shack will prompt you to experience an encounter with the “true” living G-d and cry out to Papa. Shalom!
October 13th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Sky,
The problem with this book has nothing to do with how it effects true believers who are grounded in the truth. True solid Christians cant be shaken by fiction. The problem is with new Christians and unbelievers getting the wrong perspective of God (as He truely is). Also why dont you address Him as God, not G-d?
October 19th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
Who of anyone in this blog has corresponded directly with the author?
How fruitless is conducting a critique trying to answer the author’s “theological” meaning of a fictional book - without engaging the person who wrote it? Every writing has a purpose, what do you know of Young’s purpose that has been directly communicated to you by him and relayed in this blog?
Until you know from his perspective, it is not Christ-like to tear down another brother for what he might mean. What gives?
Jesus would love Mr. Young, and if he has a critique, would speak with mercy and authority, knowing truth about that which he addresses. That is called wisdom.
Anyone who “casts out demons in Jesus name” is OK with Him. Don’t stop him. That is scriptural.
Perhaps you should reread this book with some imagination, and through the filter of your heart. If something is not 100% biblically accurate, leave it at the altar of Truth, and for crying-out-loud live a little.
One last point, you are demonstrating why much of the world is defending themselves against Christianity…you make it a head-game, when even the unsaved know it is a heart-game. You have scared them off with your “theological” analysis and dogmatic portrayal of who God is. Somewhere in your heart, you know better.
October 19th, 2008 at 7:21 pm
Oh yeah, take this to heart…God is using this book to reach many with His message in his way. He is sovereign, and as The Shack points out, that it is all for the good of those who love him, you believe that, don’t ya?
October 30th, 2008 at 2:56 am
I’ve read 100’s of reviews of this book and by far the most of them claims that it changed their lives and perspective of God; something that the Bible appearently failed to do. This is a world that’s hungry for the Gospel, but unfortunately we are willing to settle for something a bit more appealing: a God that expects nothing from his children while promoting a life free from the “burdens” that comes with the Bible.
While the Bible says the road is crooked and narrow, this book is like a bulldozer trying to make the road wider, more straight and more accessable to everyone.Noble - yes, biblical - NO! Scary stuff…
November 3rd, 2008 at 7:41 pm
Obviously, if the comments are radically different then the author did not get his point across. Therefore I would have to believe that his literature was not spiritually inspired.
November 9th, 2008 at 10:21 pm
@Mary -
In countless forums, bible studies, Sunday school classes and college discussions, I’ve seen radically different comments about the Bible - So, by your statement, I would have to guess that the Author of the Bible did not get his point across, and that the literature is not spiritually inspired.
November 10th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
Kelly,
You are flawed in your thinking, because you are putting this book on the same level as the Bible. God’s Word is God’s Word, and this is just a book. Since this is not a salvation issue I would refrain from arguing about it, but would discourage anyone from reading it because of this very discussion.
But this is my perspective at 15 years of age!
November 11th, 2008 at 2:51 pm
Hi Mary,you talk about putting this book on level of the bible as if it were not possible or allowed,surely if God is love and all that we do is product of God. Is it not possible that this reading could be the work of God?
God is good,this reading is good and therefore reflects God in it’s teachings.No offence,just a view.
November 11th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Raised a christian with an open mind I found the Shack refreshing and empowering. The power to question, to think, to explore the possibilities while turning to the very essence of God’s word is a rare thing to put into a book. Truly the work of God who is guiding its very success.
For those who cry heresy and spout damnation of the book and author, I pray for your recentering on the teachings of Jesus and a release from the fire and brimstone evangelical ways thrust upon you.
It is time to return to love and peace and reject the teachings of recent years that have divided chirstians and drawn hard lines between “US” and “Them.” The Shack brings that into focus and sets a foundation of growth and reconciliation.
Peace and Hope for All.
November 12th, 2008 at 4:22 am
Wow! I have just finished reading these comments and I am saddened by most of these exchanges. I read the book and loved it. I wish it was a true account of what happened to Mack but of course it is a work of FICTION! Still it has helped me to try and understand the good that can come out of any situation. I have reflected on my life and all that has happened to me and I have indeed found the good in the pain. Reading this board and the anger and arrogance of some of the people here professing to know the only “way” to God is unbelievable to me. In fact it truly shows how following only a religous doctrine divides us and keeps those away from GOD. Please know I respect your way of knowing God, whatever institution you may choose to know Him. If a religous organization brings you closer to God, then that is good for you. But those of you SCREAMING here at others for their beliefs or chosen religions only proves the point of this book. I will give this book to my friends - believers and non-believers and hopefully it will prompt them to search and find God and happiness in their lives. That is what this book is meant to do. I am very glad I read it.
November 25th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
I am glad that this book is getting so much attention. A dear friend and pastor recommended it to my husband. My mother-in-law then read it and then I read it. It has sparked a great deal of discussion and believe me, we open our Bibles as we discuss various parts of the book.
As a work of literature it is not the best I read. Yet, there are some lines that are elegantly written.
The beauty of this book is that it brings us closer to God by making us think about Him, read about Him, and talk about Him.
One person wrote that he is sad that ‘new’ Christians are reading this book. He also said that he realizes he can never know God. But that is what God wants, for us to have a personal relationship with God the Father through Jesus.
Of course this work of fiction doesn’t address all aspects of following Christ, nor should it. We must read God’s word, spend time in His presence, fellowship with others, serve and more.
I recommend The Shack and tell readers to remember it is one man’s work of fiction.
Why didn’t we have this much discussion when George Burns played God in a movie?
November 27th, 2008 at 5:25 pm
I was set not to like the book, The Shack but after reading it, I thought it was really good and thought provoking. All the time I reaad it, I kept thinking it needs a study to go along with it. I finally decided God was urging me to write a study which I did. If anyone would like it, email me at prayerdigm.bookstudy@yahoo.com. I would be glad to send you the study. You are welcome to use it and copy it for others.
Trish Pickard
November 27th, 2008 at 10:33 pm
I have a few questions for everyone, be they fundamentalist or emerging church folk. If, God forbid (truly, I mean this), we should find ourselves in a world without The Bible, would you still be able to have a relationship with Jesus? Would it be the same? What if our world came crashing down like it did for the Hebrew people and we were exiled to a land far away from where God “lives”–far away from our temple, the Bible. Would our faith still grow? This is not meant to be a contentious question, I just wonder how you think your faith would change or stay the same.
December 9th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
I have not read the book; still undecided as to whether or not I will.
All of the “discussion” brought to mind the words of Paul in Philippians 1:15-18:
Some are preaching the Messiah because of jealousy and dissension, while others do so because of their good will. The latter are motivated by love, because they know that I have been appointed to defend the gospel. The former proclaim the Messiah because they are selfishly ambitious and insincere, thinking that they will stir up trouble for me during my imprisonment. But so what? Just this-that in every way, whether by false or true motives, the Messiah is being proclaimed. Because of this, I rejoice and will continue to rejoice.
What a comfort and encouragement to know that it is GOD who is in control, not us. It is about HIS eternal WORLD WIDE plan, not our myopic self-serving perspective.
HE is GOD and, quite frankly, He has an attitude about it. And rightly so! Who do we think we are to defend Him?! He needs no defense — He is GOD.
Now — everyone, take a deep breath in … exhale and thank Him for giving you one more example of His grace and mercy in your life — the very breath in you.
December 17th, 2008 at 6:02 am
Your review is interesting to say the least. I would expect more from a scholarly review, but alas I find it full of holes in various places. You totally misrepresent various facets of the books, and certain theological persuasions in general about which you obviously haven’t studied very much.
I would hope a seminary professor would not let personal grudges against the author taint his review. Yet since there is a personal history with the author, your review comes across as an attack more than a scholarly critique (albeit very nicely disguised in a “scholarly” way).
I have previously taken apart Challies’ “critique” and I plan to do so with you as well. The book is not perfect by any means, but unfortunately your critique is sadly wrong in many areas.
I would encourage further dialogue through the internet so all can see after I publish my critique of your critique. Unlike you, I do not know the author and therefore might have less temptation to be so subjective in how I interpret matters.
I hope you will see this debate in brotherly love and I look forward to our exchanges on this matter.
December 20th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
Hi,
I believe God will save all on the last day. On the last day, all shall be raised. None shall be lost. All the Father has given to the Son shall be raised. None can snatch them out of the Father’s hand.
Also, please study Reformed orthodoxy. Yes, all were reconciled on the cross. I like John Murray - the Atonement best for that. It was complete on the cross as Jesus also attested, “It is finished.” All are INCLUDED in Christ when they believe. The work of the Holy Spirit in including us in Christ as faith is granted by grace to believe… is in God’s time. Yet the reconciliation on the cross was complete when Jesus, in one sacrifice for all sin in once for all time - in one point in time declared, “It is finished”. Yes, of course, we must all be brought to living faith in Christ. Only the elect are brought to living faith on this earth in this age and at this time and season of the body.
http://www.the-highway.com/atonement_murray.html
Please study this well - because it stands as Reformed orthodoxy that all who are included in the atonement WERE reconciled by God on the cross in Christ. The Atonement is a perfect work. It’s benefits are guaranteed to all who were atoned for. The HolySpirit will, in due time, bring all those atoned for to Christ and grant saving faith by grace unto all. The necessity of personal salvation is, of course, not discounted… but is rather, in the Sovereignty of God, guaranteed in the Atoning Sacrifice in Christ by which and by whom God DOES reconcile. (I’ll leave it to John Murray to defend.)
6… “determinism and coercion”?? There is no “determinism nor coercion” in the Spirit of the Lord. God is Love. When God touches our hearts by His Spirit with His Love and reveals Jesus Christ, rather we are unshackled from the bondages of sin and self and Satan… it is by the work of the Holy Spirit in grace that we are set free and have power in God’s Love by His grace to willingly and freely choose Christ as we are set free… and liberated by love.
And who really cares if organized religion took a papal turn and condemned Origen?? The view of final restoration was the majority position of the early church through the 5th century.The rulings of organized religion condemned many born again Christians to death as heretics. We may want to recall the Protestant Reformation. The scripture itself bears truth and evidence to truth - not the Councils of men in their errors and their demands for doctrinal conformity… who have murdered many in the name of heresy and even stated that to say the earth was round was heresy deserving of death.
I could answer more, but will leave off there. It seems we have great misunderstanding of one another’s positions, in truth.
I don’t deny a personal devil. I don’t deny any orthodoxy of scripture.
I don’t think people understand the cross fully. The cross fully satisfies the justice of God. The cross fully empowers God to have mercy on all at any time. God, in His Sovereignty, has chosen not to extend that mercy to most of humanity in this lifetime. God has decided to save only a remnant church in Christ in salvation in this age. Such is Limited Election. God didn’t “owe” any of us “escape” from His wrath in Final Judgment on sin in the lake of fire. But God chose to extend that special mercy to the elect.
That doesn’t mean the lake of fire fails to destroy all sin through wrath and Judgment in finality and totality.
We need to strictly, imo, delineate concepts from other concepts and “sort it out” without blurring things together by assumption. So much of what people think is just an assumption. We have to “separate out” each concept from each other concept and make each piece of the puzzle distinct… THEN… put the puzzle pieces together appropriately.
Until we look at each piece of the puzzle… we’re just assuming, imo. Much theology is assumption based on knowing a truth, being satisfied, then making broad sweeping assumptions about what we don’t know based upon what we do know - and calling it “good”. We’re still blind. We still have to study. We have to replace assumption with illumination.
Until we produce an anointing of full shekinah glory - we do not yet comprehend grace at the level at which grace exists in the throneroom of God.
The fruit. We must seek the fruit of the Spirit. If we study just to know something - that is not the point. The point is to manifest the Love, the Spirit, of God and to be changed and transformed and renewed from glory to glory into the image of Christ until we have truly achieved… seeing Jesus… face to face… in the Word.
That’s why I came to your posts. You said you wanted to see Jesus… and I think that’s what drew me.
When all the puzzle pieces are in place… there He is!! Not assumed in blindness… but truly seen in illumination… Jesus… all of Him… the beauty and the wonder and the glory of His face!! And we then reflect His image. We must needs, at that point, manifest the Spirit of Glory… at the level our hearts truly hunger and thirst and desire and seek… and shall never be satisfied until we attain.
I could discuss scripture in response… but I did elsewhere. I’ll just say - even still - no, the puzzle pieces are not being described as I see them revealed in God’s Word as I see the face of Jesus as I see Him in beauty and glory divine… at the level sharpness I see Him… like the Lasik surgery of the Holy Spirit still sought that we might have eyes to see… and see Jesus revealed in His Word… for who He is.
He’s in us… we want to see HIM IN ALL HIS GLORY!!!
Sound doctrine?? It will produce shekinah glory… it will produce the fruit… when we seek Him with ALL our hearts…a nd find Him… and see Him… as He truly is.
I think you made broad sweeping assumptions about “who” is UR and what they believe… and lumped us all into one category that doesn’t “fit”. Here’s my orthodoxy:
1. Total Inability
2. Unconditional Limited Election
3. Unlimited Atonement (effectual to all who are atoned for as Reformed theology states).
4. Revelation Power - the Power of Love and the Word to change us (sometimes called Irresistable Grace).
5. Perserverance of Saints (secure salvation sealed in the Holy Spirit).
I’m quite orthodox.
I’m just a mix of Arminiasm/Calvinism that is UR. Everything orthodox in my born-again faith in Jesus… not some “out there” non-orthodox in things person.
In fact, I think Arminiasts are wrong… I think Calvinists are wrong… and I think I’ve lined up systematic theology properly.
I don’t think I’m wrong - I think others are.
Grace to you and happy searching… happy seeking to see His face.
Grace.
December 20th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
I just copied and pasted a reply to another post. Sorry if there’s any confusion. I commented on some things I specifically related to his blog.
Grace.
December 26th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
I was set not to like the book, The Shack but after reading it, I thought it was really good and thought provoking. All the time I read it, I kept thinking it needs a study to go along with it. I finally decided God was urging me to write a study which I did. If anyone would like it, email me at prayerdigm.bookstudy@yahoo.com. I would be glad to send you the study. You are welcome to use it and copy it for others.
Trish Pickard
December 27th, 2008 at 9:08 am
I loved this book and I have been telling others to read it. I found it very moving and know many people whose lives have changed for the better by reading “The Shack”.
I think that if you have anything bad to say about the book then you didn’t learn anything by reading it. God wants us to love one another, not judge anyone, forgive each other and let God into your heart and have a personal relationship with God and Jesus!
I felt so relieved after finishing the book. The author simplified the important stuff that we need to do to be a child of God.
December 27th, 2008 at 4:25 pm
It’s interesting that the story The Shack should ignite so much criticism and debate. As a matter of fact it is almost ironic. After all, the message in The Shack was, to a large degree, about relationship versus independence/power. I fear that many fundamental evangelical leaders who criticize this enlightening piece of allegory (or fiction) are at risk of losing their credibility with the younger generation who have a heart-felt desire to know and follow God, the Trinity. By sounding so over-judgemental, they risk falling into the very category that the book itself speaks of, that being judgemental rather than loving. I can see where these leaders are coming from. There are a lot of warped views about the Trinity, Christ, messiah-figures etc. The Bible remains our objective source of who God is in His revelation to us. Nonetheless, I believe it would be better for these leaders to focus on the positive refreshing possibilities that the book opens the doors to, rather than focus solely on the critical theological nit-picky stuff. Then again, maybe I’m the one being judgemental of them, I don’t know.
December 28th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Just finished reading the book last night. The author obviously has been liberated from “fundamental” theology that hurts and divides.
I just happended to read this morning in the Bible “..the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ” II Thes. 1:7,8
To say that this book is not a theological statement is moronic. He spends the majority of the novel parroting his “liberated theology” through his three “God Puppets”. It is curious that God speaks little if any about His Word. Seems the prophets, Jesus, and the Apostles spent much time exalting the centrality of God’s Word within the bible. Our enemies primary MO is “hath God truly said?”
A few years back we attended a church in which the minister, a graduate of Duke Divinity School, would ridicule reading the scriptures literally and snickered at the thought of God actually killing anyone. He warned of people who worshipped a book rather than the “true God”.(obviously a figment of his own flawed thought procecees) He talked of a warm, loving God who would never let anyone go to a place of eternal torment. That people of many religions ultimatly worship the same true God.
I see a lot of the same thoughts in this book. Wider grace, emergent theology, universalism…Jesus came in Grace and Truth, you cannot speak of forgiveness and love without qualifying God’s requirment of re-birth and accepting by faith the message of the Gospel. “If any man hath not the Spirit of God, he is none of his” Romans 8 “Unless a man is born-again he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven” Jn 3.
This feminized God of coddling and butter cookies is appeals to fallen human reasoning. But what about when Jesus himself says,” And I gave her space to repent of her fornication; and she repented not, behold, I will cast her onto a bed, and them that commit adultery with here into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds. And I will kill her children with death: and all the churches shall know that I am he..” Rev 2:21-23
“But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Spirit, and to keep back part of the price of the land?….thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God. And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost; and great fear came on all them that heard these things.” Acts 5:3-5 I could go on and on….you just don’t hear anything like this from “Mama God” or the cool-buddy Jesus or the subserviant Asian Holy Spirit in Young’s treatise on what God is REALLY like.
Don’t take my thoughts wrong, I am as free-thinking as they come, but one thing God has burned on my mind and heart in the 25+ years of my journey,..that “thy Word is Truth” and through the Word, God is truly revealed. I was touched by the book and I think by and large it was heartwarming and acceptable. But Young’s allusion to univeral salvation and a God that would hurt no one is simply un-true.
January 1st, 2009 at 9:43 pm
Mr. Young,
I appreciate your review, but I have some questions. Obviously you have a unique vantage point in that you have known The Shack’s author personally and debated theology with him. You state on the About page of this website you said you were in Christian “think thank” with Mr. Paul Young until 2004. Would you mind sharing the name of this think tank? I am also curious in knowing if anyone else in this think tank has published a review of the book to compare it with yours. Also, have you had any discussions with Mr. Paul Young since writing this review? Thanks.
January 6th, 2009 at 6:31 am
I think it is wonderful that Faith filled fiction is coming to the forefront. God is showing himself in new and exciting ways. In ways that most religions cannot offer today. A God of love, of peace, of reconsiliation, a God of Truth. And the Truth will change you. Books like “The Calling” and “The Shack” will challenge readers and encourage them to look deeper at their faith and what they have been told the nature of God truly is.
January 6th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
One thing that worries me about The Shack is the role that Sophia (the wisdom of God) plays. During Mack’s weekend at the shack, the three personalities of God each say in turn to him “Tomorrows a big day for you.” The main event of the big day is a meeting with Sophia, the wisdom of God. It seems that it is this meeting that really ’sorts’ Mack out and leads to change in him. More weight is given to Sophia in being a life changing force to Mack than to the members of the Trinity. They are support actors in comparison, making him pancakes and generally being encouraging. Sophia has the central role in confronting Mack with truth and revelation. The members of the Trinity seemed rather impotent to me in the way they are portrayed in this book.
There is a huge following of Sophia in our day. The wisdom of God is real and is good but this current day following has made wisdom or Sophia as an entity to be worshipped.
This is the most worrying aspect of The Shack for me. It may seem a small point but does I believe open people up for more input about the centrality of Sophia at a later date.
Secondly I can’t quite see why this book has made an impact on people. Could someone tell me? Is it that God is presented as 3 persons who relate to each other in love? Didn’t we already know that?
Like many other things what is a beautiful truth has been presented in a distorted way. God is loving and relational. I want to know God in that way - I believe I do - but I don’t want a God who makes me pancakes. When I see God I will be so awestruck I will fall down in His presence. God IS a God who holds us and embraces us but that doesn’t make him a cosy God who makes me hot chocolate and tucks me into bed.
I believe I am broad minded. God is totally more than I expect and anticipate. He is not in a box and can reveal himself in all sorts of ways but that does not mean he appears to us in all sorts of shapes and forms - whatever each of us need. This opens us up to get into all sorts of fantasies and delusions if we think like this.
Lastly, the abduction and murder of Missy is truly gruesome. The book, although offering hope of a good outcome (being with Jesus in paradise) seemed to make light of a truly awful fact. I found it especially hard to swallow when Papa said to Mack that he would have proud of Missy when she was being abducted, that she had peace and was strong. This was truly hard to believe that a 7 year old girl would feel like that being abducted and terrorised by an insane serial killer. I would NOT give this book to anyone who has gone through such a thing. It trivialises the suffering. At the end of the book I saw there was a Missy Project. I thought “Good - they are perhaps raising awareness, starting a work that helps victims of child abduction and murder” but the Missy Project turns out to be a way of getting the book better known.
January 7th, 2009 at 9:31 pm
I appreciate Paul’s willingness to be vulnerable and expose himself to all the crazy criticism this book has generated. For what it’s worth, it was a huge blessing to me and cut through a lot of churchy stuff to get to the heart of things - God LOVES us!
January 8th, 2009 at 8:44 am
Well said Ros. Great book for those who enjoy reading. Not much on critiquing. PY kept my attention and interest from start to end. All my friends who have read The Shack loved it. Thank goodness for freedom of opinion.
January 16th, 2009 at 11:30 am
[…] an outlier. In book discussion groups and on message boards devoted to The Shack—and I warn you, there are many, both online and in real life—you’ll find hundreds of testimonials from readers who […]
January 22nd, 2009 at 2:28 pm
Where can i start? very few books have touched me like the shack. People can pick it and pull it apart but even if you can just take away the message of God’s unconditional love then its done something. As I read the book i questioned how i thought about God and it just made me realise how its me that limits his work in my life and not the other way around. Unfortunately im not one who picks up on the controversial issues about God appearing as a female and many others I have heard people mention, so try not to get stuck on those issues and look at the basic message of the book. Definately will be suggesting as a must read whilst in church on sunday. Thank you William young for the impact it has on me.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:42 am
This is a courtesy note, alerting Prof. De Young that I have written a paper discussing his review (pro as well as con) at
http://www.evangelicaluniversalist.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=180
(The initial comment in the thread provides my summary remarks, parallelling Pr.DY’s summary remarks at the end of his own paper; with a doc file attachment at the end of the comment.)
We certainly invite him and anyone else to dialogue with us on evangelical/orthodox universalism, if he feels led to do so. (Or not, if not–no pressure. {s})
The pseudonymous professor “Gregory MacDonald” (author of _The Evangelical Universalist_) is one of the guest authors of the site, as will be Thomas Talbott (author of _The Inescapable Love of God_). We would be happy to host any dialogue between him and these authors if he is led to want to arrange one. (Or with me, if he wishes, since I’m the one who wrote the paper. I’m not a professional scholar and teacher like Gregory and Tom, however.)
We certainly thank Prof De Young for making his review publicly available for comment.
Cordially,
Jason Pratt
_Cry of Justice_ — 2007 CSPA retailer poll Novel of the Year
January 25th, 2009 at 2:29 am
“I see a lot of the same thoughts in this book. Wider grace, emergent theology, universalism…Jesus came in Grace and Truth, you cannot speak of forgiveness and love without qualifying God’s requirment of re-birth and accepting by faith the message of the Gospel. “If any man hath not the Spirit of God, he is none of his” Romans 8 “Unless a man is born-again he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven” Jn 3.”
But what makes the commenter think God is not able to cause men to be born again when they leave this world??
Why must God think the way man thinks??
God is able to save all mankind even through the lake of fire.
It’s the deification of man which denies God’s Sovereign power and authority to cause all mankind to be born from above.
It’s ultimately man-worship to deny that God is able to cause all mankind to be born of God.
Universalism isn’t apostacy.
The worship of man that states God is not able is apostacy.
Some people need to humble themselves and worship God rather than man and see that all things are possible when “who to worship” gets really straightened out.
God bless.
February 1st, 2009 at 2:19 pm
I found this book poorly written; in particular the cock-and-bull about the relationship with his daughter who gets murdered just reeked of ‘American feel-good TV movie’.
Jesus-Cult propaganda I’ve heard a thousand times before - accept dressing it’s schizo/pain=love deity in PC clothes.
I stopped reading it when it got to ‘Adam and Eve’ and refused to contiue - I am sick to death of having that poisonous Jewish myth as an explation for human misery.
People who enjoy or take comfort in rubbish like this are sick indeed.
February 2nd, 2009 at 9:55 am
Universalism is not heresy? Well, maybe not if the Bible is not scripture, not a supernatural message from the Creator. If, however, the Bible is God’s self revelation, then we can rest assured that Universalism is indeed heresy, and that God has no intention of saving people through the lake of fire. It is appointed to man to live once, and thereafter the judgment.
I thank Professor DeYoung for his scholarly review, I have shared it with many people seeking discernment on this book. This is another thoughtful review worth reading;
http://www.calvarycsd.org/docs/Discernment%20&%20The%20Shack.pdf
February 3rd, 2009 at 4:51 pm
I thought the book was thought provoking and did exactly as the author was trying to do; produce discussion and perhaps question our own faith. Since I have finished the book I have not stopped thinking of Jesus and making him part of my every minute breathing. This is what it did for me. Now can I criticise for that? Perhaps if the only thing anyone takes away most powerful after this book is GET OFF the mouse wheel of this world and realize Love and Relationships are the only thing that matter. If you cannot find good in the novel I recommend to those who disliked it to go put in another Hollywood DVD movie and kick back and live in this world while it is still available; for me Hollywood is a joke and unedifying. God Bless all you who JUDGE.
February 5th, 2009 at 9:48 am
I loved this book! I have been growing in my faith in this direction for awhile and this book shows such a wonderful understanding of the God I love and serve. It says in 1st John that God is love. Jesus says that all the prophets and their words all hang on the commandment that we love God with all our heart, soul, strength, and mind, and our neighbors as our selves. The Old Testament’s people’s understanding of God was very limited, but our understanding of who God really is was shown in and through Jesus. Love - that is what He is all about. Love to the degree that God has shown through Jesus invokes such a response of thankfulness and love in return to Him and to each other - much more than fear could ever bring. I believe that the fear that is written into the scriptures was all about control and God is all about free will, not control. I love the Bible because it shows us the story of how God was always present and working in his people, but to take it literally is not what I do. If that were true, then a lot of people would be going around with an eye gouged out or a hand cut off. The scripture tell us to in order to love God we have to hate our mother, father, etc. We could not take that literally or we would hate our families. Scripture tell women never to cut their hair, to cover their heads in the temple - that was all a culture thing. The God I love and serve would NEVER tell anyone to go into a village and kill every man, woman, child and animal. I choose to serve the God I see portrayed in and through Jesus, and The Shack gives such a vivid picture of that One. As far as universalism, the Bible does say that All knees shall bow and every tongue shall confess that Jesus is Lord - what does ALL mean to you? Again, I look at that scripture through the light of Jesus’ love and thus I know that everyone will be with Him someday. God bless all of you as you travel in your journey with Christ and in his love. Thank you, Mr. Young, for writing this most insightful book.
February 9th, 2009 at 6:39 am
I agree with Cindy Crosby, reviewer of “The Shack” from “Christianity Today” who said, “Rather than slicing and dicing the novel, looking for proof of theological missteps, a better approach might be to look at significant passages as springboards for deeper discussion. The Shack is a novel, after all, not a systematic theology. Keep that in mind when reading The Shack. Despite its weaknesses, this is a story with the potential to wake readers up, to rekindle or reinvigorate their faith. In an era when so much Christian fiction is about pat answers, conventional themes, and the regurgitation of what we already know and believe, such stories are good news for thoughtful readers”.
February 11th, 2009 at 8:21 pm
Here’s my opinion, and I have to be honest - this book is not good. It started out great, right up until the miraculous changing of the seasons right before his eyes. Follow that with chapter after chapter after chapter of conversation and boy…hard to read, follow and enjoy. Glad others are finding it enjoyable, i am just not one of them.
February 13th, 2009 at 8:53 am
“The Shack” inspired emotions in me that are usually pushed aside and forgotten/hidden. I try to take something away from every book that I may read whether it be fiction or non-fiction. This book inspired me to build a relationship with God and those around me. The quote, “I forgive, I forgive, I forgive”, gave me a useful tool to use throughout my day when anger and resentment occurs. I can’t explain it but when the author describes Jesus, The Holy Spirit, and God I had chills up my spine and tears were brought to my eyes. Is this just emotionalism or the Spirit speaking through me? I like to think of the latter. I am in no position to argue with anyone on Religion or Biblical truths. I will argue that this novel explains the importance of forgiveness, love, and building a relationship with God and others. That doesn’t sound evil to me.
February 14th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
Someone told me about the Shack. He raved about it so i went on the net to satisfy my curiosity before i got the opportunity to read the book. When i read all the negative comments especially those who sliced it with words of scripture, i could not help smiling. It was the Jesus story all over again as is played out several times over in every generation. The Pharisees used SCRIPTURE to prove to Jesus that he could not be the Messiah! They always found loopholes in his words and actions were not scriptural in their understanding. The letter and the spirit?? And these were custodians of God’s word! Someone even posted a quote “. . .the larger the crowd, the more probable that that which it praises is folly, and the more improbable that it is truth; and the most improbable of all that it is any eternal truth” and went on to distort its context. What about the huge crowds that followed Jesus? I knew then i had to read the book. The negative comments were more inviting than any advertisement. I am happy I did. It was a privilege and a gift. And it expanded my heart to receive more of this unconditional love that God is all the time offering.
William, you did a brave thing. And you are braver still to leave all these comments on your website. Thank you for this gift to the World in our time.
February 18th, 2009 at 8:27 am
I think this was a fantastic book and it just goes to show that everyone has thier own religious preferences. I’m not going to sit here and argue wheter or not this is “blasphemy” or if Mr. Young is right or wrong. I happen to have my own beliefs about God and whether or not he is real, but, I do feel like this book has given me something to consider in regards to that, and I hope everyone will see it as Mr. Young simply sharing his beliefs and not try to put it in a category or match it up to the bible…
February 24th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
Brandon G,
To answer your questions: 1) the forum was called “M3 Forum” (for the 3rd millennium), co-founded by Paul and me. It is no longer operational due to a spat over PY and his views. 2) To my knowledge no one else from the forum has written a review of the bk. I wrote a critical review of P’s position on univer. reconciliation at the time (2004). 3) I spoke with PY in May, 2007, when he affirmed his belief in univ. recon.; in Feb 2008 he said he is not where he once was, that he is a person in flux and it is wrong to categorize him. Thus I deal only with what he has written. James De Young
March 1st, 2009 at 11:05 am
Two of the greatest lies Satan has fostered onto Western (modern/scientific) civilization include:
1. Satan does not exist.
If Satan is not real, then there is no real accountability or responsibility for sin.
2. Confusion about who God is. If Christians and others can be confused about who or what God is, then they are apt to believe anything.
On the one hand I can believe readily that I don’t understand everything about God, and I don’t want to be like the religious authorities of Christ’s time who were so certain of what Messiah would look like that they failed to recognize Him when He came. At the same time, though, I do believe that God’s Word is true, and is God’s direct revelation to us about how we are to live, and defines our relationship with Him. I think that anything that purports to describe God’s qualities and be a revelation from God should line up with scripture. If not, then we should reject it.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:40 am
I work in a Christian bookstore that sells The Shack. I am not a fan. I have read it several times and discussed it with many customers.
I do not think we should be carrying this book. Yes, I know it is FICTION. So is the Da Vinci Code and we didn’t sell that!
A mature Christian could read this book, glean what is acceptable (not much from my reading, but some things) and say about the rest, “Well, it is fiction.” If we only had mature Christians as customers I would not be so concerned.
But we have immature Christians and non-Christians who come into our store. An immature Christian (and someone who isn’t Christian at all) may read this, not able to discern “fact” from “fiction” and go away with beliefs that are not only not Christian, but are heresy! They might even happily grasp and cling to such teachings because they are pleasant to read and believe.
Why would we sell a book that might lead someone to believe heresy?
What amazes me about this book is the way it divides people. They either love it or hate it. I have pointed out things to my manager and he reads the dialog in the book and can’t see it. It is as though he is blinded to the actual words. This is from a man who is normally very discerning! He adores this book! I meet very few people who have a “take it or leave it” attitude. Instead people find themselves arguing about a stupid work of fiction! Causing animosity in the Body of Christ. This alone can’t be good!
March 22nd, 2009 at 2:30 am
There seems to be a lot of people who have seemingly never written much more than the two or three sentences they typed to criticise this book, and therefore actually have no credibility whatsoever. Until these people have a ’solution’ to what they perceive as the problems with ‘The Shack’ I would suggest they keep their collective mouths shut.
No one, ever, has been able to describe or understand the fullness of the Trinity. It is an abstract concept and transcends logic or reason. Anyone who claims to have a proper understanding of the Trinity is a fool who is getting close to implying that they are GOD!
Is this a perfect rendering of the Trinity? no, but it never suggests that it is. The underlying truth of this book, regardless of the pedantic picking at delivery, is that God wants to be in relationship with us and wants us to live life in all its fullness.
No one I know is suggesting that this should replace the Bible, but if this book helps someone find God, or come back to God or helps them through a troubled time, then surely it’s not a bad book?
March 22nd, 2009 at 2:51 am
Having read a lot of these posts, I remember why I have no interest in affiliating with the majority of Christianity. Scathing, nasty, critical, judgmental (being a little ironic myself. I understand Gandhi when he said “I do not reject your Christ, I love your Christ. It is just that so many of you Christians are so unlike your Christ.”
March 25th, 2009 at 5:06 am
This is not a book for new christians. Nor is it a book you give someone who you are trying to witness to. This is a book for someone who has, or once had, a relationship with God and has drifted away. If this book simply helps just one person get that relationship with God back…then how is this book a bad thing?
April 3rd, 2009 at 6:02 pm
Simply, the story has the power to bring us into a closer relationship with ‘Papa’. How can that be anything but good? I am 65 years old, and have never been closer to Him/Her than I am since reading this book. I am grateful that God has used these people to bring a renewal of faith to so many!
April 13th, 2009 at 5:02 am
Dear theshackreview,
As a response to the outcry in Christian circles to “The Shack”, at the risk of being self-serving, may I recommend “The Wordsmith, the Kid & the Electrolux”? It has been reviewed as “a thoroughly Christian allegory in the Reformed Protestant tradition (with an embedded classic Van Tillian apologetic).” It also has been featured on Chris Arnzen’s “Iron Sharpens Iron”. If you are interested in receiving a free copy please contact me.
Cliff Leigh
cleigh@evergreene.com
April 23rd, 2009 at 1:36 pm
I revisited this website at the request of a friend; her pastor is “teaching” from the pulpit and using “The Schack” as his point of reference. Apparently the book left him feeling warm and encouraged enough to subtly promote the work through his sermons. That is the very problem I had with the book; that it, like a number of other “easy read” and popular “christian” works would be used to “explain” God in ways thought to be remarkably better than His inspired Word.
This defies the clarity of Scripture, the idea that God desires to be knowable to mankind and has inspired human authors through His Holy Spirit to write 39 books that make up the Bible. These works are foundational, critical, a “must read” before straying into fantasy because they reveal God as He wants to be known and exist in relationship with mankind. These books are full disclosure as to His revelation of salvation towards that end.
Having books that provide a sound reference–meaning the metaphors and allegorical figures can stand up to biblical criticism–is very important. The Shack fails in this regard, and comments of that nature are not to be taken as a vendetta against the author, but are a warning for those who will rush to promote this book as though it serves as a reliable commentary on what Scripture presents as to the nature of God: Father, Son, Holy Spirit. The concern I have is not so much with the author, it is with a “christian” culture that races to embrace popular fictions and sincere meditationals as a means to avoid the very words of God.
Those who fail to take every advantage to study God’s Word (and I don’t believe a seminary education is vital to that process) will risk accepting as truth images that contradict what GOD Himself chose to share about Himself in Scripture.
If we as churched people who have embraced knowing and loving the God of Scripture were reading this book, The Shack, without reference to it as a form of “truth,” I would say there is little problem other than poor writing. But let’s be honest; the churched are, by far, often too lazy to commit to the daily pursuit of God in conversation with Him and in searching His Word. That the world and our own nation are so deeply indulging in the rejection of God testifies that we are not salty enough and our light has grown dim; that is the fruit of a lazy churched people.
If we do not have our feet firmly grounded in the Truth expressed in Scripture first, because that is GOD’S love-letter to us, how will we identify and divide between truth and fiction when it is presented to us by those who mean well and are trying to be creative, but lack precision in portraying Who God really is?
My friend’s church, and many others based on an Internet search as to how the book is being used, are greatly at risk of distorting who God says He is. That is a scary thing as it may turn the sincere intention of “making God knowable” into making the convert twice as fit for hell as the one who cannot see the clear distortions presented in a thoroughly human work. That is a chief reason I cannot recommend the book in any context other than one in which there is significant critical examination of the claims that arise in the book when compared with the claims of Scripture.
April 28th, 2009 at 9:02 pm
here is my full length thoughts on The Shack: http://didaskalia.org/blog_list.asp?cat=Strange%20Fire
May 1st, 2009 at 2:04 am
The Shack (title) is a metaphor for the clandestine prop-ups, odd slabs of siding, sagging roof, and un-plumbed crookedness of this over-caffeined freshman cramming for his finals. What a mish-mash of gnostic nail-missing and dull-sawed occult-mysticism by PY, WJ, et al..! This is Carl Jung, Ruth Carter Stapleton, and Roy Lee Masters, drinking their third pint of Guiness, flesh-to-flesh in a hot tub, reading ‘A Course In Miracles’. I enjoyed Catherine’s brilliant analysis (above). The disconcerting thing is that apparently there are so many naive I.Q.-of-5 sheeple out there buying this pablum. (I’d like to market my new line of unscented perfume to them..!)
May 11th, 2009 at 11:14 am
To Catherine, Philip and other literary experts:
Lighten up, we can’t all have PhD’s like you. And where are your intelligent books out there? How many have you written? Oh that’s right, nobody will publish them b/c they’re boring. You criticize other’s IQ, yet it’s those who are critical that are the insecure.
The book is entertaining fiction. As an added bonus, it made me appreciate the love of Christ. It will never take the place of scripture, but that’s not the intent.
May 16th, 2009 at 4:06 am
As I read over these posts and other reviews I’ve pondered on the Shack, it is clear that the influence of Paul’s novel may rival the influence of many noted biblical scholars and maybe our personal interpretation of scripture, itself.
As much as evangelists and fundamentalists have tried to present God’s love as “unconditional” even the most sincere of bible teachers and preachers must have their tongue firmly fixed in their cheek, to say so. Jonathan Edwards’s sermon (Sinners in the Hands of and Angry God) would be considered much closer to the biblical view of God, and main line thinking, than this fairy tale written by a father to his children.
The image of God through Max’ experience is far from the image we get from “turn or burn” theology. One is the image of a God defined by the Old Covenant view; where the chosen rule and only the righteous receive reward while the unrighteous get what’s coming to them. The other is an image that we seem to only wish were true of God; an image that makes us want to crawl up in his lap and linger in his presence; an image that really believes that nothing can separate us from the love of God (not even a fathers bitterness for the murder of his child); an image that describes Aba as Jesus must have known him.
The beauty of this debate is how it reveals our own individual image of God and the scripture we use to define him. That’s why it moves and affects so many readers. And, no doubt, how we view God will most definitely affect how we view our drunken neighbor or someone less pious.
Is it possible that those who exalt Holy Scripture over relation with God will likely come to the same conclusion as the first time such a test was applied to an innocent rabbi, 2000 years ago? Jesus said to the experts of the day, “you search the scriptures because you think you’ll find everlasting life in them but when love stands before you’re not willing to embrace what I am, or who I am” (Mhz translation). They believed, and used, much of the same scripture (and image) to condemn the Savior that we use to condemn the Shack and the image it portrays of our God. Maybe scripture and theology need to be defined by the person of Jesus and not the other way around.
Dare we believe in a God described in a novel, written by a man who let his heart lead instead of his denominational dogma, or scholarly acumen. Is it really possible that the God described in a bed time story is more accurate than the one defined by generations of religious dogma, damnation pundits, or pompous scriptural exegesis? History has a way of repeating itself and here we are again. The debate will never end.
If it be true that Paul Young has denounced such an unconditional love… I am greatly saddened. But I can only imagine the pressure men have heaped on him for such heresy. After all, how could a non-theologian, writing his first fictional fantasy, come up with a more astute image of God then the image our many years of religion and scriptural discernment has concluded?
Paul, what were you thinking?
May 22nd, 2009 at 5:29 am
The Shack is a poorly overwritten book with an even sillier premise about God and his relationship with us. It’s a typical feel-good Christian book that throws out absolutes in favor of moral relativism. Like Thomas Jefferson, the author probably has a Bible that reads like a CIA redacted report where all the parts he doesn’t like are cut out.
May 25th, 2009 at 4:14 pm
I really wish you people who are commenting would really take a good look at the book as a story and not compare it to the bible or anything like that. The book is mad to shed a different persons veiw on how god works. Accept it, understand it, and dont focus on the flaws but focus on the good that comes out of the book.
May 31st, 2009 at 11:29 pm
I am so relieved to have found a site where I can share the deep frustration I feel over reading “The Shack”. I am an avid reader and also a christian women. I see no problem in the way the author chose to present the Father, the son or the holy spirit(at least physically) But this book was long winded, poorly written and I at times found it painful to push through to the next page. What a waste of time.
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:14 pm
From the beginning I have suggested that The Shack is filled with distortions about God and relationship with him, the Trinity, the nature of sin and judgment, and the place of the institutions that God has ordained (namely the church, the state, and marriage). I have claimed that these distortions arise for the most part from a common source–universal reconciliation (UR is the idea that all in the universe, even those in hell and the Devil and his angels, are going to escape hell and go to heaven. UR appeals to the love of God as trumping his righteousness and justice). The author and editors have claimed that they removed these elements from The Shack. But they remain as the core that bring the kind of distortions I’ve cited above.
I now want to justify this claim. I’ve known PY for over a dozen years and have had many discussions of theology with him. We co-founded a Christian think tank. It was in this context that he presented his book-length defense of UR in 2004. In this document he embraced UR and rejected evangelical teaching. He claimed that it changed his life and his theology. It is this, he said, that made him a more loving person.
I wrote a reply then to say that I believed that PY had slandered God and Jesus Christ.
On this web site I will soon post part of my forthcoming book responding to The Shack. It reveals some of Paul’s document that I responded to in 2004. This should end any doubt as to Paul’s theological positions out of which he wrote The Shack.
June 18th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
The first half of the book I fouind to be somewhat dry and choppy, if not poorly written. I must confess however, that I could not put the second half down. There is no question that the author makes you think. Nearly every universal question that all humans ask themselves at some point in their life is addressed. I found the answers given by Papa, Jesus, and Sehru to be quite thought provoking and if I were asked the same questions, I think I might have provided similar answers. I think the main point of the book is that God does not allow bad things to happen in our life, but rather man’s actions through his free will, cause bad things to happen, and that God uses those bad things as an opportunity to bring us closer to him.
June 18th, 2009 at 1:24 pm
Christians?
I totally agree with you. I have to stop reading because I am so saddened. I don’t understand how Christians can go around attacking others and calling them names. Don’t forget, it is not our job to judge, it is God’s. If you didn’t like the book, that’s fine. However, I don’t believe God would appreciate attacking the author or others for reading and getting something out of it. Remember “turn the other cheek”.
June 20th, 2009 at 7:11 am
I am a fifty one year old ordained minister. I loved this book. I grew up with an abusive father. The depiction of God, who is Spirit, as a wise and loving black woman freed me and brought tears to my eyes. I have nothing to share in terms of literary analysis or theological sharpshooting. I can only say that the Trinity now is something I can embrace with not only my mind, but my heart and spirit as well. I judge books according to the fruit they bear. This book will increase faith and trust in a loving God, the One Jesus came to proclaim. Jesus was also judged and criticized by “religious” people jealous over his loving image of God and the peoples’ love for him. They too hurled “knowledge” and “tradition” at him, they also used scripture as a sword to try to undermine his message that God is love. After reading many of the sanctiominous comments here I smile and know that the author is in good company. The living God can do anything and routinely does. This book makes just that point. Praise God for it.
June 20th, 2009 at 7:24 am
AMEN Greg. Praise God for HIS love, your words AND The Shack!
June 21st, 2009 at 8:32 am
My stars people! I can’t believe some of the things I’m reading here! Some of these comments are downright vicious! If God is anything, God is love. Where’s the love here folks? Don’t wonder why fewer and fewer people want to go to church these days with the way some of you carry on. I love God, but some of this nonsense is precisely why I don’t go to church.
I, myself, thought the book was wonderful. And yes, perhaps there are a few minor points that aren’t theologically perfect, but you entirely miss the point of the book if that’s all you can see. One of the book’s main tenants was the idea that God isn’t so much interested in us following a list of rules, God wants to have a relationship with us. God wants us to love him, and he wants to love us back. If all you could see was the mistakes in the book, perhaps you are one of those that is caught up in the rules and could possibly benefit from reading the book again.
And it boggles my mind how people could have such a bad reactions to how God was portrayed in the book. Why is is such a bad thing to portray God as a black female? I found the image of God in the kitchen making breakfast for Mack to be very warm and comforting. Why can’t God be a God of warmth and comfort? Why does God have to be all hellfire and brimstone and lightning bolts from the sky? I want my God to make me hot chocolate and tuck me into bed. Did Jesus not say “suffer the little children to come unto me?” And are we not all God’s children? And exactly how do you show love to a child? Hot chocolate and a warm hug and kiss goodnight sounds like a pretty good start to me. God is not a God of vengeance. Eventually, God will have His vengeance, but God is not just the gatekeeper at the gates of hell, mercilessly throwing unrepentant souls kicking and screaming into the fires of hell. God is love.
God doesn’t want his followers to cower in the corner in fear. God wants us to believe that he is the all-powerful God, accept his salvation, then love him and place him at the very center of our lives. If we love God and place him at the center of our lives, all the “rules” take care of themselves.
And those of you that object to God being referred to as Papa need to lighten up a bit. God doesn’t care if we start our prayers with “Most high and holy heavenly father, ruler of all heaven and earth” or “Whassup dude.” God just wants us to pray to him, and know and trust that he is God. God will meet us wherever we are.
And those of you that think that somehow you have a corner on the market when it comes to interpreting the scriptures, a word of warning. God specifically says we will never understand him completely. “Through a glass darkly,” remember? And people who think “I’ve got it right and you’ve got it wrong” crack me up. All the wisdom of man is folly in God’s eyes. The wisdom of man is what has led to so many denominations in the Christian church, with each denomination pointing their fingers at the other and saying how they’re all going to hell in a hand-basket because they don’t believe the way we do. Please!! If you believe that way, you can also benefit from reading the book. One of Young’s points was that religion is an institution of man, and often quite far removed from what God wants from us. And if religion was an institution of God, why is it that more wars have been fought over religion that anything else? Can’t we all come to see that in the end, Protestants, Catholics, Jews and Muslims all worship the same God, the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob? Don’t twist this into me saying I believe what’s written in the Koran, because I don’t. I’m just trying to point the folly that is religion. God doesn’t care what church you go to. Going to church isn’t what keeps you out of hell or gets you into heaven, it’s your relationship with God that determines that.
And that’s what the book is ultimately about. It’s about relationship, not rules. It was never Young’s intention to write “The Bible, Version II,” and shame on those who would try to hold it up to that light. Perhaps you need to shift the way you view this world and start looking for the good in life instead of trying to ferret out all the bad. There was much that was good in the book, and you need to see it for what it is. God is love, folks. Let’s try showing some of that love for once.
June 21st, 2009 at 4:47 pm
Dear David W:
You are not far from the kingdom of God - you get it!
And you get Jesus. Your comments brought a smile to my face and gratitude to my heart.
In His mercy and love,
Greg
June 21st, 2009 at 6:41 pm
Dear Danny in Bama:
Thank you for your loving kindness to me.
In the Risen One,
Greg
June 26th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
I enjoyed The Shack. It is easy reading with a simple message of love and reconciliation to relationship with God. Congratulations to the folks who have written with moderated tones. You are the ones with whom I would appreciate discussion about the pros, cons, and theological impact of this book.
Shame on those who yell “Heresy!” from the rooftops. From the beginning of Christianity there have been discourses, divisions, and divisiveness. All brought about by our human tendencies to agressively defend our beliefs. (Because if we believe it, it must be true. And we would not like to be proven wrong!)
In Matt 10:34 Jesus says that he has not come to bring peace to the earth but a sword. Have you taken it upon yourselves to swing a sword among the children of God? Is not the 2nd greatest commandment to love one another? Such vilification of a work of fiction, simple and imaginatively presented (even if not by some literary standards), as well as the vile attitude coming across by those who screech DOCTRINE, shows the watching world that Christians are divided and prideful. “For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.” (Mt 7:2) Get off your high horses and step down into the muck with the peasants, the servants of God. Servants share the WORD of God with humility and kindness, not by brandishing the Bible as though it were a weapon to prove a point.
The Shack has a good message. It shouldn’t be taken as scripture. It shouldn’t be used to establish doctrine. It should be read. If it pleases, wonderful! If not, let it go.
Those who preach the Good News must do so as Christ did, with love and in love. Those who do so will be listened to, and the glory of the Father will be revealed.
May you all be blessed by God’s merciful hand.
June 27th, 2009 at 7:16 am
Well said, Kathy.
June 27th, 2009 at 11:41 am
David,
Thank you.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:54 pm
Dear Kathy:
I appreciate your prophetic insight, intended and offered with graciousness and love.
I find harmony with both you and David W. I am weary of division, judgement and legalism in the body of Christ. If Jesus himself wrote a novel, an army of Christians would rise up to tear it down and to question his orthodoxy. Many Christians lament the waning of church in our culture and age - not least among the reasons is a generation of people who are tired and suspect of the scandal of Christians judging and maligning others. The Pharisees are alive and well, continuing to hold the law over our heads and insisting on following the letter of the law instead of the spirit of the law.
July 1st, 2009 at 5:08 am
Kathy, Greg, and David,
Good for you! This fiction book is enjoyable, giving a good feeling to the reader. To some, it is “out there”, well then, put it down! My my, some people get very touchy when confronted with a simple message of total love.
July 1st, 2009 at 9:58 am
I have just read James B. DeYoung’s critique of The Shack, and just want to add my two cents to it.
First and foremost, as a journalist by trade, I believe that a critique should be fair and unbiased above anything else. To pretend that you can somehow write a fair critique when you know the person whose book you’re critiquing is just wrong. And DeYoung admits that he had a falling out with Young, which makes him the last person who should be doing a critique. There is simply no way someone can write an unbiased critique after having a falling out with the author.
And after reading the critique, I feel it’s criticisms were based on a preconceived notion. DeYoung says that he had a falling out with Young over Young’s belief in “Universalism.” Then DeYoung makes the assumption that somehow that belief has still “crept into the book,” despite the fact that the book’s editors say that every effort was made to remove any vestiges of that belief.
One cannot set about to do a fair and unbiased critique when they approach it with preconceived notions, especially then those preconceived notions are based on a personal encounter that resulted in a parting of ways.
As a result, I think DeYoung’s critique did a lot of reading between the lines and looking for miniscule points and passages from the book to prove his preconceived notions right.
Simply put, I think DeYoung did the author and the book a great injustice. It makes no difference who asked him to do the review. If he had, or has had, issues with the author, the correct and proper thing to do is say, “I’ll pass.”
Now I’d like to say something to both men. Shame on you both for allowing what seemed to be a good relationship to come to ruin over such a thing!
To stop being friends with someone simply because of the way they believe is just wrong, and is precisely why the Christian church is so divided. I just pulled out my phone book and counted 101 (actual figure) different headings for various church denominations, including Catholics!!!! What!! How can we all be reading from the same book and be so divided?
Here’s what I have to say to those on both sides of such and argument.
IT DOESN’T MATTER!!
Nobody is going to hell or getting into heaven based solely on their beliefs in the end times, and it’s certainly not a reason for a friendship to end up on the rocks!
The truth? We don’t really know what’s going to happen in the end times. What we’re told in the Bible is often revealed in the form of dreams, and is packed full of symbolism and metaphor. The only thing that is important is that we are ready for His return. Who cares how it will happen?! The only thing that matters is that it WILL happen.
In my opinion, Christians of all denominations need to stop arguing over these stupid “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin” questions and set about doing the things that are really important in this life, like truly loving God and your fellow man.
“Can’t we all just get along?”
Opinions anybody?
July 1st, 2009 at 3:39 pm
God used this book in my life at this time to open my eyes to His unfailing love. I felt that I could relate to the character in every way, through every question and struggle, and I cried more than with any other book. I do not 100% agree with everything in the book, but the basic points: that I can have a personal every-day communicating relationship with the Almighty, that He loves me, that He is good and desires my best… I welcome these truths into my heart. Passages I’ve read in the Bible throughout my life but left behind due to it feeling stale or boring are rushing back into my mind and are for the first time making sense to me as though the words are actually alive! This book was a window into true fellowship with God for me.
I can understand where some might not agree or like the book or may not be ready for such ideas of being able to come to God and have such an intimate relationship with Him… but that’s okay. If that is the case, I pray He touches their hearts another way. As for me, I praise God for leading me to this book and teaching me what He has through it.
I have actually been persecuted by Christians in my family and church for having read and liking this book, which I think is terribly sad since most are just basing their judgements on others’ opinions without even having read the book! I started to doubt, maybe I was being foolish to think I can come so boldly before the throne of God after all. For a little while I was so discouraged to think that maybe my stale and condemning, judgmental views of God’s character were correct and I was completely mislead. But God is taking me to His Word and grounding me in truth as I continue to lay down my independence to allow Him to live IN me for the first time in my life! He’s also shown me that the point is not to become a follower of “The Shack” or the author. I am a follower of Christ now. He has chosen to bless me through reading this book, and now I am going to lay this book aside, praise God for using it to speak to me, and continue to seek the Lord with all my heart and continue in a much more full relationship with Him.
July 9th, 2009 at 9:03 pm
I just finished reading The Shack. I truly enjoyed PY’s fanciful description of the Trinity. I felt it was very eye-opening, as God could truly reveal Himself in any of the ways herein presented. Simply because the Bible does not literally describe Him as a black woman or an eclectic oriental woman does not mean that He could not. I believe He intended this book to shake up some fundamentalists who consider their dogma of the Trinity as Scripture. What I mean is that the word “Trinity” that many consider as truth is not even found in the Bible. (I looked up trinity in the KJV: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=trinity;&version=9;) I believe the notion of the Trinity was conceived of by the Council of Nicea in the 300’s AD. That being said, I think PY’s description of the Trinity and his attempt to describe the relationship between the parts of the GodHead is nonetheless a useful tool for helping Christians shake themselves from their spiritual apathy and really try to reconnect with and reestablish a relationship with the Lord of Heaven and Earth.
July 9th, 2009 at 9:19 pm
I just finished reading The Shack for the 3rd time in a row. I can not get enough of it. With each reading I discover new truths. So many questions I have had about things I read in the Bible were answered for me in a way I believe to be exactly what God would say if he could answer me like he did Mack. As I was first reading the book, It shook my theological beliefs and if it weren’t for the tesimony’s from some pretty sound Christian friends I might have stopped reading when I found Papa being described as a woman. But I read on and evey objection or question I had was posed by Mac and the Author did such a beautiful job with Papa’s answers that I truly felt God speaking through him. I laughed and cried and cried some more as I read. God must have great wit and sense if humor for us to be able to have any as humans. And wow Jesus is so poignantly depicted I actually could see myself walking on water with him:). I have been raised southern Baptist for over 20 years and have converted the last seven years to the charismatic faith. I have a strong knowledge of the scriptures and NOTHING I read in the Shack contradicts what I have learned and Sarayu AKA The Holy Spirit has testified in my heart that what I read was right. I have such a deeper love for God than ever before and it has transformed me and my thought/actions as much or more than my trip to Kenya Africa in 2007. Now I am truly wrecked for the ordinary life. Julie
July 10th, 2009 at 9:51 am
Isn’t it strange that a piece of FICTION can cause so many diverse opinions on it’s content. If it is not scripturally accurate, again…it is Fiction. If it causes one’s heart to soften, to perceive our loving Father as a loving Father, His Son, indeed to be truly human, truly divine, and the Holy Spirit to be able to affect our lives because of the love of the Father and Son then what is there in the pages of this book that distort that? I have been deeply touched by W.P. Young’s book. I find it refreshing at a time when all denominations of organized religion seem to be in turmoil. It neither offends, detracts or changes my own faith beliefs, in fact, if anything, it enhances them!
July 13th, 2009 at 6:48 am
I have to wonder why there are so many who are offended that God was depicted as a woman. I wonder if the same people think twice about God choosing to reveal Himself as a burning piece of shrubbery.
I was convicted as the author points out how God is not limited to operate within our human minds limit. I have to admit that I believe the depiction of the trinity in this book is probably closer to the truth then what I have come up with in my mind. After all, had the bible not said so, would any of us imagine God as a burning bush?
July 15th, 2009 at 9:53 am
I’m amazed at some of these reviews. (especially the ones critical of the writing style, and the ones marking the author as racist) Although, alas I guess that’s what “review” is for.
I am not quite sure how I feel about the book, other than it was touching and thought provoking most certainly. I am probably more in the target audience, having been raised in ‘church’ and having had a previous strong relationship with God, and having lost a child to death(although not to murder) thus leaving me with an anger at God that I would be hard pressed to explain to someone who hadn’t experienced it.
This book didn’t take away my unanswered questions, nor did it leave me ‘less angry’ with God. I wish the book had actually focused MORE on Macks anger and questions because it seemed to be erased pretty easily. I assume that is because Mack is fictional and the author really feels that such an experience could/would wipe away the anger and satisfy any lingering doubt in this grave situation. Now, since I’ve never had this experience, I don’t know. Maybe it would. But reading about it didn’t take it all away for me. But I did think about it more. And I’m still thinking about it all.
And I don’t see at all why there would be anger from the ‘religious’ realm about this book. It’s a fictional experience, likely aimed to help people understand God (people who don’t already).
Anyway, that’s my non-literary, average joe-ette ‘review’.
Interesting, thought provoking, wish there was more.
July 16th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
I just started reading “the Shack” and probably won’t get my shorts in a knot about the theology, becuase it is fiction. But as fiction, it’s pretty lousy. I’ve experienced better writing from middle schoolers. The character development is so non-existant that I don’t really care about Mack or his problems, and I’m pretty sure I won’t care what his God looks like. The dialog is stilted, and the plot moves forward by giant leaps, not at all in a realistic way. Why, oh why, do “Christian” publishers keep putting out books by “Christian” authors that are this bad? Please don’t tell me that the media is making Christians look bad; we do just fine all on our own.
July 18th, 2009 at 2:50 am
All I can say if the Bible is the only way to God why is it that church atendance is declining, certainly in the UK and across Europe,can’t speak for America.The Bible whose message is written from the perspectives of an ancient people does not seem to resonate to 21st century western thought. My view is if this book can have the effect of touching your heart and leading you to God, even to the Bible itself then it has done its job. Lets not forget although the message of the Bible is timeless the delivery has to connect with the people of the day. It is not disrespectful if this connection needs to be through a different medium. Jesus used this way. He spoke in easy to understand parables to the masses, yet in private he relayed to his disciples the deeper meanings of his message. Strangley these are absent from the New Testament. What are they and how different are they from his exoteric teachings via the parables. I am afraid that anything “new” is always viewed with suspicion and allsorts of claims attributed to Biblical inerrancy are paraded to frighten those who read anything other than the Bible as a way to God. One has to realise that many, many other scriptual books were left out of the New Testament for reasons best known to those who deemed what was right and what was wrong for inclusion in the Holy Scriptures.The choosing of those books were made by mortal men.Men who you may claim were divinely inspired if you wish,but it was more likely to do with what conveniently at the time was more aprropriate.I have read this book and I have to say cheesy it may be, fiction it may be, but it has led me back to the Bible, but most of all to the love of God. The book never claimed to be divine or set up to “take on ” the Bible. It is a book I reckon that resonates with ordinary people who find little or no love in churches or in the messages of their pastors or priests who just will not identify with the way people think today. The message of the Bible transcends all we think it is trying to say. Remember we are limited God is not and it might just be,that God is speaking to us through another medium. After all storytelling and the oral tradition of the ancient Jews was their means of revealing God’s word. Why should it be so different now when Christianity in the West in particular is just not connecting with the people.I will pass the book on and hope it will lead others back to the Bible and its teaching just as it did for me.
July 22nd, 2009 at 9:27 pm
To all who have left comments saying people are being judgmental in criticising The Shack I would just like to say don’t confuse it with using discernment.
July 29th, 2009 at 5:32 am
Certainly my Theology of the Godhead is not destroyed.First it isa story albeit unconventional,but PY deals with this in the book.God can not be put in a box and if He chooses to show Himself as a big black women,why can’t He.What is wrong with practicing the presence of God,Forgiveness,and that God really really loves us.I’m sorry to hear people condemn the book based on reading mixed reviews.I enjoyed it and feel closer to God for having read the book.I would pass it on.As an aside my spiritual beliefs are very fundamental and I would describe myself as well studied.
July 30th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
I think the problem we all share, well you all share here is exactly what the book spoke about. We (humans) look so deep, and try to make rocket science out of the simplest things. Its a book, just like a good ole movie (fiction) can drone some deep feelings and sentiments. Stop over evaluating everything, when we do that we lose beauty of the smallest most pleasurable things put here for us.
August 15th, 2009 at 11:01 am
A lot has been said for and against this book in this forum and a myriad of other fora.
I have three comments to add to the discussion:
1. God can use anybody and anything to move people’s hearts and minds and draw them closer to Him. For many this book does does exactly that; for many others it does not. IT MATTER NOT IF IT DOESN’T! Why are we clawing each other over our understanding of how God communicates? Can we not together rejoice that God is using one of His own to move people towards reconciliation (irrespective of the labels we want to put on it)?
2. In our pursuit to be like God, Babel placed a wedge in our communication and since then we have played right into the enemy. We need more expressions like this book which helps open our minds to the possibility that God is far more than we have ever imagined him to be! Let’s not be afraid of those who challenge our minds! Instead we are better fearing and staying away from those who destroy our minds with hate, drugs, alcohol and other debauched ways of living!
3. Many, many years ago, God’s powerful compassion moved me and I have often thought that perhaps His compassion is significantly grater than we give Him credit for!
He sees us in the state of sin and knows well that rescue from this state is around the corner.
Surely, God who is love, is moved by compassion (not pity) to do all He can to rescue us from the state of sin which will soon be obliterated forever. Why else would He send His Son?
Submitted with prayer.
August 31st, 2009 at 7:36 pm
Ijust finished reading The Shack.
I have to say it is one of the most eye opening books for me.
I also have had severe personal trama in my life with the loss of my 14 year old son to suicide. Plus the murder of my little sister by a monster as was discribed the The shack. I have had so much anger and pain that I have compartmentalzed all those feelings.
Reading this book was like looking at my life and feelings. I wish I could have experienced what Mack experienced up at the shack. But I feel like I was there partialy with this book.
I have read a lot of books to try and help me get thru my grief and pain. This one opened my eyes and heart more than any other.
Some of the reviews have said this is a dangerous book. That it is incorrect as to how the author portrays God and Jesus and the Holy spirit.That it doesnt follow scriptures. How can any one belive that with a out saying that ever persons view is the same.
We are all differant and that was aparent in this book. We all see, believe, think and feel differant. We all have free will and we all have differant ideas about what is what.
This book helped me to realize that all the stuff I have been holding in these past few years has only hurt me. Blame and anger and thoughts of revenge has only stopped me from being healthy in my mind and my heart. The term “Let go and let God.” That is what I believe the author’s message. It has given me alot of food for thought.
I was raised Mormon. I went to Church every Sunday. I left orgonised religion because of the so called leaders that said I had to believe the way they thought. I know I did not have to do that to have God in my heart. I belive that I am loved and my son is not in any pain any longer. My sister is not in pain they are both loved and happy. If you think that this books message whas wrong or dangerous RE-_READ IT AGAIN!!!!!
I know I re-read it many times and will share it with many people. Thank You
September 14th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
From my point of view, the book is almost a must-read for any interested believer, agnostic or total nonbeliever. The story puts so many conceptual ideas into an understandable perspective for a layperson like me who continues to have questions with organized religion and information received from various experts on the topic of God, the Trinity, our Creation and how we fit in as individuals just doing what we do and going to work everyday. Even though it is an easy-read, I found myself rereading passages, underlining sentences and paragraphs, laughing, tearing up and sometimes just putting the book down for a break and to reflect on what I had just absorbed. In a good way it was kind of exhausting for me because it made me think and reflect on issues I had not considered for a long time.
September 23rd, 2009 at 10:44 am
I have read the book, liked it, got some good from it and during the read i found myself stopping and pondering the love that God has for me. Then praying to god. It may not be biblically correct or be true. In my opinion only the bible is true. I find it quite ironic that most of the people who have the worst things to say about the book, the author, how could he write this, did he not think, he is a begginer novelist and more all seem very sound in thier relationship with God.
I know in writing this response i keep hearing the holy spirt telling me dont be a judge.
I wonder if that was reinforced from the book. Commenents if that is a good or bad thing?
Did anyone else hear anything from God when they were choosing to reply to this?
Christians if you know more than i do please dont tell me what i should know help me understand and give me guidance as a brother/sister and walk with me not throw stones at others. If i didnt belive in God at all and i read some of the comments i would wonder how people who belive in God can be so judemental. I would not want to associte myself with people who when someone shows their heart however true or false slam them for opening up instead of caring enought to lead and help people grow.
I commend anyone who can open up enough to be vulnerable to another person. It is a very tough choice to be open and you need to pick who you are open with. First to God and to your brothers and sisters. The internet lets people feal anonoumous i wonder if everyone would say the same things face to face.
As you can tell i think i have made spelling errors and probably grammer errors, sorry.
I hope we all can help each other with any tools possible to lead each other to God.
Please dont take offense i just realy recieved something from the book and wanted to see what others recieved. I finished this morning and now i read many negitive judgemental comments that have lead to me to question what i recieved.
still pondering
God Bless
Corey
September 25th, 2009 at 2:18 am
I must admit, I enjoyed the first few chapters but then felt it digressed into a droll of passive ideals which don’t really align with the Bible. If I read a Christian book, I want it to be theologically sound, I felt that this was not.
October 7th, 2009 at 4:57 pm
Should I tell you why so many people don’t want to follow Jesus because they don’t see the relevance in him because all they see is traditions and religiosity…
This book has open my eyes and heart and help me to understand God so much more, now remember God wants a relationship with all of us after all that’s why he sent his son he sacrifice so much so he can be with him, and what is a relationship with God like? its someone that you can go to and share all your deepest fears , dreams,desires, it’s a father, mother, a sister a brother like no other…
Now i’m not going to be so nice like Corey last message who I admire and I think is a wonderful person , but I think everyone who dislikes this book , or says its doesnt shows God in the right light etc are one ignorant and 2nd arrogant 3rd short sighted …and for some 4th envious
The writer done a wonderful job of opening our minds to the loveliness of God,
God is God he number one goal is have a relationship with us, if you read the bible as a whole you should understand that if you don’t get that, well you need to ask the Holy spirit to help you understand.
This book has help me and my friends understand God so much more and it has soften my heart to not be so righteous, its a book that I do not feel ashamed to let my non Christian friends read…
It something that they can relate too..
remember people Jesus related to people of his time , he walk with them eat with them drank with them and even alcohol too ..
so people lets not build a religion and lets not be religious…as that has never really help people …but love , relationships, forgiveness, the fruit of the spirit stuff is what changes lives and that is by understanding God just loves you soo much he really does , once we experience this , we wont need to bible bash people with Jesus they will ask us whats different about you,,,after all thats what people of Jesus time said about him, who are you ? who this man that performs miracles and heal the blind?…….
People love in an action we and trust me if we do that more people will soon be asking us …what is it that we got …!
October 17th, 2009 at 5:57 am
Well said, Matty. …Couldn’t agree more!
October 17th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
Not once in this book did it ask anyone to align it with the Bible. This a great fictional read. That’s it.
Stop being so mean to each other in your comments thinking your opinion is just so full of wisdom. These comments are just other people’s point of view of a fictional book.
If it brings people closer to God…so be it. Maybe the next book they pick up will be the Bible.
October 18th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
OMG! When will people finally realize that GOD does not need you to defend him? This is a work of fiction, not a substitute for the bible. However if it brings people closer to knowing the true GOD, why on earth do you insist to judge it? If you disagree with this novel so be it, but allow GOD to use it as he sees fit, which none of us can comprehend. He is the final judge of all, I find it SOOOO absurd that men and women can become so defensive and feel we were chosen to save humanity from itself. This novel was simply that, whatever you got from it be it good or bad only reflects who your are. Each of us need look in the mirror before engaging a soapbox. I liked this novel for what it is, a pleasant read, that incited my emotions and left me touched and inspired to get closer to GOD. If the book hasn’t done this for you, the problem most likely isn’t the book but much closer to you than you allow yourself to consider. If you feel the need to defend I beg you to consider making another wrong generally says that you have laid judgement upon them thereby making you just as wrong. Forgive my indulgence in judgement.
Lance
October 19th, 2009 at 7:09 am
The dead giveaway is when El Ousia (Greek) tells Mack to do what he wants.
“Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law” is from the Satanic bible.
Sorry - the book appears to be demonic in origin and content.
November 2nd, 2009 at 10:30 pm
I’m not really interested in being accused of being a universalist, satist, ignorant, stupid, worldly follower, or whatever demeaning phrase some “Christian” can cook-up to trash my character. There are many who wish to trash the character of Paul Young, denounce the book as religious heresy or false doctrine, and accuse Christians of replacing the bible with it by putting words in the mouths of others. We first and foremost need to remember that we are, at least most of us, Christians and it should not be in our “new nature” to literally attack the character of people who disagree or don’t see eye to eye with us. That’s wrong and we shouldn’t write off our behavior as discernment. Read your bible and analyze the people in it which act that way and then reassess yourselves. Also, quit posting Shack attacks when you haven’t even read it. Have you not realized that people read things to confirm their own biases and then write about it online?
As for the Shack: READ IT. It is not a biblical replacement or supplement. I strongly disagree with the attacks on the points in the book. They portray a relationship with God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. This relationship is one of trust, love and growth. The whole story is God chiseling away the pain, anger, unbelief and bitterness of Mack and others through his transformation. Wow what a transformation and God promises to take all of us through (of course not in a fanciful interaction with colorful characters off in the wilderness but a never know.) I am 28 and was brought up in a christian home where, like many christians, God was angry at me and was constantly threatenting me with hell (at least this is what I was taugh by my family and my church which were both charasmatic) For me this book took my knowledge/experiences with the church/bible and it took the church doctrine and washed away many discrepancies and contradictions introduced by man which were forced upon the people of the church through hierarchy. It reaffirmed my own biblical studies which were sometimes in contradiction with the “word” as presented by the church. Such as God is wrath and he has a gun pointed to your head and says “choose Jesus or burn in hell but love me just the same.” Granted this is an over simplification but you get the point. God is love and the bible shouts it out and he wants to be with you. The bible scholars above who seem to lord their supreme understanding of scripture and scoff in the face of Christians who have been walking in clouds of confusion need to get real with themselves. People are forced into chains sometimes within the church and God wants you to break free and experience his freedom. God is not a book, he is living and wants a loving relationship with his creation which was damaged at the beginning and repaired when Jesus died at the cross. Even the stories of Gods wrath are part of the love story of the Old Testament. As for the Bible: READ IT (much more than the Shack as it is fiction and merely helps us understand the nature of God through amazing pictures). Lastly, not everything in the Shack is perfect theology so take the meat and spit out the bones.
November 13th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
I believe the book is accurate as to what God is like. The problem with most over educated people is that they think way to much, God created us to love him, and for him to love us.Except it now or on your death bed, but all knees will bow to the one living, loving God.For everyones sake i pray it is sooner, because you have no idea what you are missing out on.
December 3rd, 2009 at 9:08 pm
Conservative/Reformist theologians and believers = Generally don’t like the book. They cry heresy.
Charasmatic/Pentecostal believers = Maybe like it (well in parts)
Many ‘Evangelicals’ (whatever that means today) = Like it/Love it
My Opinion - personally I have more important books to read at this time. My wife read it and we talked about it. Maybe good in parts, weak in others (like all books)
Reading Bill Johnson’s books - so good! (sorry conservatives - haha)
December 7th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
Toward the end of the book, Mack is given a choice to return home or remain. Hello? Since when does this become our choice?? Does that not vastly differ from everything we read in the Bible? I guess at best the book reinforces the fact that Christians, whether new or old, should encourage one another to seek answers from the one and only book of truth, the Word of God, The Holy Bible. If you have time to wade through The Shack, then you have time to study scripture.
December 11th, 2009 at 4:07 am
I have not finished the book yet. I received it as a b-day gift from my father.
While I get a bit “touchy” by religion subjects (I personally dislike the way MEN subverts the teachings of religious books), I read the book (not finished, tough) and have some considerations I’d like to expose:
1 - Shallow, beaten up premise: Father who lost faith because of daughter’s death. C’mon, it’s been used a little too much nowadays.
2 - Modern view of God: I can relate to that, but I thought it was kinda forced to the “audiences”. Felt like some sitcom about family, man.
3 - The “God and friends” style of encounter: I personally think it’s not the best presentation of the subject, but wasn’t the worst either… But I confess I almost slept on some parts (Mack and Jesus watching the stars, for example. God cooking, as another. Sarayu walking in the field…).
4 - The idea that God loves you, but you are free to do as you please: I thought it is good, but didn’t quite agree with the way it’s presented in the book. I personally think God is EVERYTHING (not in a blind-faith way of saying, but that of everything that is, “good” or “bad”, it’s part of God). We are free to do as we please, but that’s God - The way it was presented on the book reminded me of that tale where Buddha bets with some dude that he could go as far as he wanted, but he would never be away from Buddha. The dude travels as far as he could, but when he stopped, he realized he was still in Buddhas hand palm. THAT is MY idea of God: I can do whatever I want, but I can never be away from God. I personally don’t buy the idea that when Im good, Im living through God. When Im bad, its just me exercising free will. Cmon, lame.
I am finishing the book, and got most of its ideas (that we must live through God to really appreciate life at its fullest; that we do not need to live in pain, because it only drives us away from God; that we need to accept life as it is…), but, nonetheless, I still think its kinda shallow on its presentation.
The point is: warm, same old story concepts for showing another view of “humans x God relation”.
December 12th, 2009 at 8:39 pm
Amazing. Reading these responses reminded me of exactly why I ran away from the church and religion so long ago. It was conflict then and it remains to be conflict now.
It wasn’t until the recent passing of my wife that I began to crave a relationship with God again and began attending church and bible study on a regular basis. Although I certainly find comfort in hearing and reading God’s word, I can’t say that it has helped me to build a relationship with God. Maybe it is because I didn’t grow up with a religious background… or maybe it is because I didn’t acquire knowledge through schooling… but for me, it is not as clear cut as it may be for some of you and I find it all to be very complicated.
The Shack, although fiction, grabbed my attention. It invited me to open my mind… to see that I have over complicated my own life… and in some way, it allowed me to seed my relationship with God. If nothing else, this book gave me a reason to continue growing that relationship and a reason not to give up on church again.
With all that said, I can’t help but to wonder if my views of church and religion are more common than we know. In times where revival is needed, maybe we should be less critical of a book that opens the door to what it is that God wants from all of us?
Thank you to the author for this wonderful experience.
December 13th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
If you like The Shack, you might also enjoy Forgiving Ararat by Gita Nazareth. It is a murder mystery/supernatural thriller with elements of historical and religious exploration and a wonderful Christian message. It’s about a lady lawyer that dies and goes to a sort of Limbo where she’s told she must defend souls in the Final Judgement. While she explores this imaginative afterlife, she tries to solve the mystery of her own murder. I’m a publicist and fan of the book and would love to read your comments here should you choose to read Forgiving Ararat by Gita Nazareth. thanks
December 14th, 2009 at 6:04 am
No offense, I’m sure it’s a great book and all, but this really isn’t the place to hawk it.
December 17th, 2009 at 11:40 pm
No, actually, I think Sharon is right.
The Shack has recently been made a heated comparison between The Lovely Bones and Forgiving Ararat that it has really become an interesting debate as to how readers are responding to the three books.
I’ve read The Shack and it was a love/hate combo. I’ve read and loved Forgiving Ararat. And I’m reading The Lovely Bones. Until I’ve finished reading all three can I make my judgement. And I reckon that’s what any readers who are open to good recommendation should do.
December 18th, 2009 at 9:36 am
I have just posted a review of The Shack at http://jandcbrand.wordpress.com/book-reviews/the-shack/
December 18th, 2009 at 10:16 am
I loved this book. For me, it answered so many questions, as well as opening up new ways of thinking of things. Another book I recently read builds on this: Gita Nazareth’s Forgiving Ararat. This book too explores themes of judgment and forgiveness in the face of violence. As a fan and publicist for this book, I’m interested to see what parallels are drawn between the two.
December 30th, 2009 at 3:22 am
I enjoyed the book. I particulalry liked Papa’s idea that it’s all about verbs and relationships. The narrative didn’t make clear it which verbs are the best ones for purposeful relationships. Can somebody throw some light?
January 13th, 2010 at 12:22 pm
It is interesting to see how people break out on this book. Quick answer for me is I liked it. I have my review on the Praytel.net blog.
http://praytel.net/blog/post/2010/01/13/The-Shack-by-William-Paul-Young.aspx
January 16th, 2010 at 6:27 am
A PRAYER FOR THE PRODIGAL MACK
God cast from His presence, Unbelief in real essence,
Who then set themselves up in “the Shack”.
As earthlings below, these imposters we know
To be papa, sonjesus, sarayu and guest Mack.
Inside, the Deluded, chant dogma that included,
THE UNBELIEVERS DOGMATIC, DOCTRINAL, DECLARATION OF FACT
It matters not what in Adam you’ve done,
It matters not what in him you’ve become.
It matters not that God you offend,
It matters not that His Son He did send.
It matters not His Spirit you blaspheme,
For we three as god are here to redeem.
Throw out that ole Bible, but paper and ink spills,
For it raises guilt, disturbs conscience - all manner of ills.
It’s Author writes of new birth, new life, repentance and faith,
In summary we say - all things that we hate.
We promise smooth sailing, bury all your life’s past,
For love, joy and peace are your possession at last!
The gods and all peoples have universally reconciled,
You can be most certain, you are their dear child.
It is a great message, all are forgiven
Everyone born will end up in heaven.
sarayu, the spirit, chants same doctrine absurd,
Don’t worry, Be happy, In h a u n t i n g dischord.
Outside the black shack, In Jesus’ Name praying,
Believers seek a stay, of unbelieving Mack’s slaying.
“Dear God,
Though your presence be a consuming fire,
Destroy “the Shack” - not Mack, it is but “wood, hay and stubble”
In all it’s entire.
Call Mack to faith in the Saviour, May your purpose in grace overcome
His foolish unbelief which flows, from an Adamic nature undone.
On the purchase by your only Begotten, who died in sinners stead,
May your Spirit resurrect Mack, yet in his sin dead.
May You raise him to spiritual and eternal life,
Ending his condemnation, in sin and in strife.
May he cry in faith, “Abba, Father”, as a new born in Christ made,
Knowing forever that he has been saved.
Lord Jesus, Intercede for him in glory, True faith to take hold,
Indwell him by your Spirit, and grow that faith bold.
Heavenly Father, You have Authored a Book.
Self-revealing, Self-attesting, Self-authenticating therein,
Promising presence with you in heaven, A complete deliverance from sin.
Meanwhile in “the Shack”
Within Mack’s soul, a spiritual war rages,
He counts the cost, He considers the wages.
Mack knows in his heart, he is “fearfully and wonderfully” created,
Body, soul and spirit - just as the Word has stated.
Mack knows “in God, he lives, he moves and has his being.”
Without God’s gift of a mind, he would not be thinking!
Mack knows of the triune God’s ultimate witness,
The “many infallible proofs” of the Son’s rising,
Have been #1 on his hit list!
The seed of the Word, however imperfectly planted,
Has yet to take root, in his rebellious heart slanted.
One appreciates the hard long winding road that Mack heretofore has trod,
Yet the Word of Truth abides forever,
“Without faith, it is impossible to please God.”
So Mack and “the Shack” face an encroaching infernal,
Judgment requires a fire eternal.
BUT GOD… THE PRODIGAL REDEEMED
But God…Eph.2:4
Against the encroachment of that hot infernal,
From which there comes no light,
Struck a lightning bolt of God’s grace eternal,
In which there is no darkness.
But God…
Two words… two small words… two single syllables,
Yet are there two more pregnant words,
In all of human audibles?
But God…
In the very contemplation of the concept of Christ,
According to His own purpose of grace before time began,
God chose in Christ a Body for His Son,
Through whom He would fulfill His salvation plan.
But God…
God, who is rich in mercy, By His own counsel and
Solely on the basis of His own good pleasure,
Chose Mack in Christ as a member of His Body,
It was not the rebellious Mack’s own endeavor.
But God…
God not only heard the prayers of the believers praying,
He ordained those prayers as part of His planning.
God uses example, prayer and preaching,
His Word to be planted in Mack’s new spirit’s birthing.
But God…
Mack was born-again of the Spirit of His Father,
The Spirit of Truth embodied in the Word,
The Spirit who bears witness with his spirit,
That as an adopted son, along with the eternal Son,
Does all his Heavenly Father’s wealth inherit.
But God…
God, who works all things together for the good of His children,
Called Mack to faith in real time, space, history,
Cleansed and clothed him in the blood and righteousness of Christ,
Forgiving him of all of sin’s guilt and penalty.
But God…
Through the gift of saving faith,
The substance and evidence of the reality of the Giver,
Mack received the peace and assurance
Of his Heavenly Father’s favour.
But God…
Mack believed on the Lord Jesus Christ,
He gave all the glory to God for his responsibility done.
Chosen in Christ, he had been united with His Redeemer,
In all the Redeemer’s work as the Incarnate Son.
For Mack, in union with Christ and His Body of believers,
There continues to be a challenge to refute the deceivers.
However, now He is alive of the Holy Spirit,
He has the Word, a written objective revelation,
A Heavenly Father, An Intercessor, An indwelling Spirit:
To teach him of His Heavenly Father’s agape love,
Felt in a warm, live personal relationship,
With his personal Saviour, the eternal Son above,
Mack is seated with Christ, enjoying His kingdom’s citizenship.
To teach Mack about his mortal body and its unregenerate members:
(the flesh, the emotions, the mind and the will)
For Mack must train them to do the will of the Spirit,
(Who gives them continual censure)
For it is God who works within him,
To will and to do of His good pleasure!
To teach Mack of God’s ultimate promise,
When Christ brings all things together in one,
To give Mack a glorified body,
Like that of the glorified Son.
For all creation groans as a mother in labour,
Awaiting the return of the Lord Jesus Christ,
When His redemption secures the rebirth of Mack’s body,
And all creation will be reborn and rejoice.
For in Christ there is a complete redemption,
Involving His Body and a new heavens and a new earth,
Our triune God will have complete satisfaction,
His justice and grace combine in their rebirth.
God’s purpose in grace will be completely successful,
For it depends solely upon Himself,
Because the Father’s purpose in grace is secured in the purchase
By the Son upon Calvary’s cross.
The Spirit applies all that the Father has purposed,
In total harmony with the purchase by the Son as well,
Giving our triune God complete satisfaction
From the Son’s souls ultimate travail.
To teach Mack of a Biblical worldview,
In which Adam sinned and died and All his posterity sinned and died
in him,
There is no such truth as deserving presents,
As there is no such truth as creature innocense.
God’s just sentence of physical and spiritual death
Binds all people and all creation,
All that of which sinful man now enjoys on earth
He has no legal right of expectation.
To teach Mack that “The Shack’s” message is unbiblical,
Along with its idolatrous and sacreligious presentation of God.
Its questions assume man is owed something,
As if sin can be blotted out by imaginary love.
Tragically, this view is shared by much of Christendom,
In which the “The Shack” is finding incredible favour,
Without understanding the just requirements of God’s judgment,
There is no Biblical understanding of God’s grace to savour.
“The Shack” undermines all biblical doctrine,
It has led people astray, as its critics have said it would,
An imaginary universal atonement - has led to an imaginary universal salvation,
As logically understood it should.
The Lord Jesus tells us to “Beware of false prophets”,
In order to keep Satan’s forces at bay,
We must have God’s discerning judgment,
Because Satan’s doctrines will lead people astray.
Contrary to popular opinion,
Not all judging is wrong,
In some cases it is the judging of judging
That makes Satan’s forces more strong.
Christians should be rooted and grounded
In the written objective revelation from above,
Studying to show themselves approved of
By the Author of that Book of love.
FORGIVENESS
God has taught us the way of forgiveness,
And all the ingredients that He has required,
By His Word and His Spirit He did apprehend us,
In the sin in which we had been mired.
He brought us to His court of justice,
In union with His eternal Son,
Against us He declared death a just sentence,
And delivered us up in His Son as one.
We were crucified with Christ on Calvary,
We were buried and punished with Him as per His law,
Thereby God has His legal basis upon which to forgive us,
It is in Him that we are set free from its claw.
He purchased us from His own court of justice,
He redeemed us as our Kinsmen-Redeemer,
He adopted us as His very own children,
By grace through faith we have become a believer.
He raised us with Him in the resurrection,
He seated us with Him in heaven,
He sealed us with His Holy Spirit,
Guaranteeing that we have been forgiven.
Therefore in the matter of us forgiving others,
The same basic principles apply,
We must give of ourselves to change them,
Though it is ultimately upon Him that we rely.
For we ourselves cannot change the inside of others
As God does in salvations intrusion.
However without justice and change the matter of forgiveness,
Is but a Paul Young neurotic delusion.
January 18th, 2010 at 5:39 am
Ummmm …yeah!
…. Moving right along!
January 19th, 2010 at 10:43 am
I think we need to keep sight of the fact that as Christians we all have the same Jesus in us. Even though we have everything we need complete in Him, the Holy Spirit is unveiling Him in it’s time and way about how complete and how wonderful the Truth is in this Person who is now our Life. The Truth is a Person - “I AM the way, the truth and the life..” - not that He has it to give us intellectually. Truth comes by knowing Jesus more and more. I have never been able to rationally bring myself to Jesus. That’s me thinking I can work my way to Him. And that is the original sin in the garden that I can be like God - an independent self. His Spirit in me has done it all. The letter killeth. He’s writing His Word - Himself - on the fleshy tables of my heart. How did Abraham become the Father of Faith and yet didn’t even have a bible? Man’s attempt at rationalizing concepts about God and saying “this is what it is” is religion and Jesus didn’t come to start a new religion. He came to bring Himself. In actuality I believe He has a plan for each one of us and we’re all at different places of being able to see all of what we have in Him. We all see only in part. He made us this way and He doesn’t seem to have any problem with it. Each one of us reads the bible and sees something different. For me to act as if I agree with what someone else has interpreted as true when I don’t really believe it would be hypocritical, and Jesus had some pretty harsh words for hypocrits. We can make what is simple - Jesus - into concepts and treatises so complex that many in the world don’t want anything to do with it. That’s the beauty of “The Shack” in that it strips away all man’s attempts to box it up (religion) and shows the world it’s about Jesus, the Person, who joined humanity to be able to relate to (be in relationship) with us. The Lord has sent this book to enable forums like this so that we can express in Love (remember Love is a Person) our journey with the Lord honestly while allowing others to express where they are on their journey, as well.
January 24th, 2010 at 6:42 pm
I’m not Christian, I do however, believe in Jesus. Jesus was a man just like the rest of us. He ate, slept and by God’s will cured lepers and has done other miraculous stuff. Jesus was not crucified but was lifted to heaven. Most importantly Jesus, not in ONE bible has ever said “I am god”. Secondly God has no need of a child , or to die for anyone’s sins! GOD is ALLMIGHTY! GOD can not be described as a he or a she. This trinity you all keep talking about…it’s about time you guys learned hebrew and revisited the “OLD” testament as you call it. In other words the original and not all these man made bibles translated by many to cover the truth. To get to the point this book whether you call it “fiction” or not is Blasphemous to the core. IF any one of you who calls them self Christian, doesn’t think so. Question yourself about your beliefs.
February 5th, 2010 at 3:58 am
My dear Namso,
While your assertion that Jesus was man just like us is true, you are incorrect in asserting that Jesus did not claim to be God. I would strongly urge you to read the gospel of John. Jesus eluded to many times that the Father and He were one and the same. (John 10:30)
God sent his son into the world not to condemn the world, but that through Him the world might be saved. We as humans are inherently evil and bad. Since God is almighty, loving, and certainly just we must be judged as such. We ALL deserve death(Romans 6:23), and since God the Father is just, we deserve hell for transgressing against God. However, since God loves us the sinner, He sent His son to die for our sins and transgression and therefore take out place in judgement. So you see my friend, no God doesn’t need a son but we do!
It is obvious that you practice Judeism. I would urge you to review the old testament especially the prophecies of the coming of Christ Jesus.
I do agree with you that this book is heretical.
God bless you and show you the truth.
February 8th, 2010 at 8:04 pm
Brace Yourself, this book The Shack is really a devils pistol covered with a silk hankie! It is loaded with LOTS of heretical teachings that end up confusing the reader and ushering in the false teaching of UNIVERSAL RECONCILIATION. This teaching contradicts the Bible in SO many ways Here is a link to a PDF file that breaks down the Heresy’s.
http://theshackreview.com/content/Comparison-Shack-UR-Bible.pdf
If you have read this book or know someone who is reading it, please take a look at this information and compare it to what the Bible teaches.