BSBKJVWEBYLTASVBBEWMBT4TDBY|HymnsMusicDonate
Menu
General

the "Shack" reviewed by Tim Challies

sermonindex May 21, 2008


[b]Time to Rain on this Parade[/b]

I am certain that there is no other book I've been asked to review more times than William P. Young's The Shack, a book that is currently well within the top-100 best-selling titles at Amazon. The book, it seems, is becoming a hit and especially so among students and among those who are part of the Emergent Church. In the past few weeks many concerned readers have written to ask if I would be willing to read it and to provide a review. Because I am always interested in books that are popular among Christians, I was glad to comply.

First, a word about the book as it is written. William Young shows himself to be a capable writer, though I would not have believed it through the first couple of chapters. The book began with far too many awkward sentences and awkward sentence constructs (e.g. "One can almost hear a unified sigh rise from the nearby city and surrounding countryside where Nature has intervened to give respite to the weary humans slogging it out within her purview"). But as it went on and as the story took over the book became easier to read. The story itself is interesting enough, though certainly it lacks originality. The last chapter should have been left on the editing room floor and the final paragraph (before the "After Words") was a ridiculously terse attempt to provide closure to remaining plot lines. But on the whole the book is readable and enjoyable. Never does it become boring, even after long pages of nothing but dialog.

But Young did not write this book for the story. This book is all about the content and about the teaching it contains. The book's reviews focus not on the quality of the story but on its spiritual or emotional impact. Eugene Peterson grasps this, saying in his glowing endorsement, "When the imagination of a writer and the passion of a theologian cross-fertilize the result is a novel on the order of "The Shack." This book has the potential to do for our generation what John Bunyan's "Pilgrim's Progress" did for his. It's that good!" Could it really be that good? Is it good enough to warrant positive comparison to the English-language book that has been read more widely than any other save the Bible? Let's turn to the book's content and find out.

The Shack revolves around Mack (Mackenzie) Philips. Four years before this story begins, Mack's young daughter, Missy, was abducted during a family vacation. Though her body was never found, the police did find evidence in an abandoned shack to prove that she had been brutally murdered by a notorious serial killer who preyed on young girls. As the story begins, Mack, who has been living in the shadow of his Great Sadness, receives a strange note that is apparently from God. God invites Mack to return to this shack for a get together. Though uncertain, Mack visits the scene of the crime and there has a weekend-long encounter with God, or, more properly, with the godhead.

Young covers a wide variety of theological topics in this book, each of which is relevant to the theme of Mack's suffering and his inability to trust in a God who could let his daughter be treated in such a horrifying way. The author is unafraid to tackle subjects of deep theological import--a courageous thing to do in so difficult a genre as fiction. The reader will find himself diving into deep waters as he reads this book. Unfortunately much of this theology is simply inconsistent with the Bible. Young shares strange ideas on the Trinity, the way God reveals Himself to us, forgiveness and a variety of other topics.

Despite the great amount of poor theology, my greatest concern is probably this one: the book has a quietly subversive quality to it. Young seems set on undermining orthodoxy Christianity. For example, at one point Mack states that, despite years of seminary and years of being a Christian, most of the things taught to him at the shack have never occurred to him before. Later he says, "I understand what you're saying. I did that for years after seminary. I had the right answers, sometimes, but I didn't know you. This weekend, sharing life with you has been far more illuminating than any of those answers."

Throughout the book there is this kind of subversive strain teaching that new and fresh revelation is much more relevant and important than the kind of knowledge we gain in sermons or seminaries or Scripture. Young's readers seem to be picking up on this. Read this brief Amazon review as an example: "Wish I could take back all the years in seminary! The years the locusts ate???? Systematic theology was never this good. Shack will be read again and again. With relish. Shared with friends, family, and strangers. I can fly! It's a gift. `Discipleship' will never be lessons again." Another reviewer warns that many Christians will find the book difficult to read because of their "modern" mindsets. "If one is coming from a strong, propositional and, perhaps, fundamentalist perspective to the Bible, this book certainly will be threatening." Still another says "This book was so shocking to my "staid" Christianity but it was eye opening to my own thoughts about who I think God is." At several points I felt as if the author was encouraging the reader to doubt what they know of Christianity--to deconstruct what they know of Christian theology--and to embrace something new. But the faith Young reconstructs is simply not the faith of the Bible.

Because of the sheer volume of error and because of the importance of the doctrines reinvented by the author, I would encourage Christians, and especially young Christians, to decline this invitation to meet with God in The Shack. It is not worth reading for the story and certainly not worth reading for the theology.

from: http://www.amazon.com/review/R181CNPBRQWDTY/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm

T
Talkn2u May 22, 2008

Greg...
I logged on this morning, to post the question if anyone has heard of this book and what they thot of it.
I was just made aware of it last night.
I was glad to see that you have already put something on here, for us to consider.

I have been online reading exerpts from The Shack.

At this point I have made a decision on an opinion but will only say that there seems to always be books that hit the "Fad Realm" in our society: "Prayer of Jabez", "Best Life Now", etc... and people seem to buy out these books in mass supply.

If it carried the Truth of the Gospel, I don't believe it would have such popularity.

Thank you for posting the review.
Bonnie

R
Ruach34 May 22, 2008

Hey Greg. I was at Mardel's (christian bookstore, in town where I live) and saw this book at the checkout, just asking to be purchased. I glanced at it, read the synopsis and the rave reviews, considered buying it, then put it down and continued on.

i picked it up because of a conversation I had with a hospital chaplain who said this is an important book dealing with the issue of grief. Theologically he said it was important as well.

I will have to send this review to him and let him read it, but am fearful, that anyone without a solid, Biblical foundation/framework, nor a steadfast devotion to the Bible's pre-eminence will see any danger in the pages.
I will hesitate to read it, if offered, and hopefully decline unless the Lord prompts me to read it. Chaplaincy is also the road the Lord has me on and the issue of grief will be addressed many times and how to deal with it. I earnestly believe the Lord will not only teach me about grief in His word but give strength and wisdom in the moments of consolation that lie ahead for me.

This trusting and walking is considerably more appealing to me and more sure than slurping up all teaching relative to the issues, as if thinking, 'if I get it now I will be prepared in the future for it.'

thank you for the review

C
chadster May 23, 2008


Just today I had a friend who was chiding me for criticizing a book which I had not read...he felt it was unfair that I would base my opinion on the reviews of others. After reading this thread, I am able to more fully identify with the frustration he felt.

I read "The Shack" and was greatly impacted by the book. I'm not saying that everything about it is theologically perfect, but I believe that God is using this book to reach scores of people who will never pick up a Bible. I highly recommend the book. The review that Greg posted is certainly in the minority...by far the majority of people who have read this book have been blessed by it. It was given to me by a very mature Christian who serves as an intercessory prayer leader who has walked with the Lord a number of years. She highly recommended it and I have since spoken to many "devoted and committed" Christians who were also blessed by the book.

Why is it that if anything doesn't line up exactly with our personal orthodoxy, we're the first in line picking up the stones and ready to bash and discredit...frankly, I find that very disturbing about the majority of the participants on this forum. Are we the only "righteous" ones in the earth??? Have we forgotten the words of the apostle about judging others? To his own master a man will stand or fall and STAND HE WILL!! God is the judge..why do we feel we need to do His job????

C
Compton May 23, 2008

Hi Chadster,

our personal orthodoxy

If the source of this controversy is rooted solely in personal preference, then I would agree that it is an unfortunate division. However it may be a hasty assumption to characterize the critique in this way. Just as it is reasonable to ask if people have read the "Shack" before rejecting it outright, it is also reasonable to consider the critiques against it before rejecting them, in light of scripture.

I wish the Shack was just being sold as a good story like the "Matrix" or Lord of the Rings". That would be fine, but instead it is being presented as a book with a unique effectiveness for conveying biblical" truths. In that case it should to be tested seriously..and even judged! We present the sincere reader quite a contradiction by saying this profound book contains deep truths about God----only you must not test it to see if this is so. The real word of God invites us to "Test all things and hold fast to that which is good" 1 Thessalonians 5:21.

I believe that God is using this book to reach scores of people who will never pick up a Bible.

With respect for your good intentions here, I would like to challenge your underlying premise. For thousands of years the Word of God has been the proper and authorized means to convey God's truth to men. It has been preserved at great price, and has survived all attempts to destroy it and deconstruct it. Now there is something deeply amiss that we think we can reach men without the Bible, even if only in the initial stages of our evangelical schemes. As well intentioned as our plans are to re-tell the bible with all new plot devices and characters, I am pretty sure they will not be met with success. Perhaps the Shack is a stirring story with 'spiritual' elements, but it is the Bible that was given for revealing God and His son, and there simply are no pop culture substitutes.

So then why does the publisher position The Shack as this?

We believe our generation is somehow unique in history. We seem to think we must leave our bibles in Church, and craft a more effective message on our own that is more relevant to 'post modern' man. Sermons abound today, where instead of exegeting scripture, the 'pastor' exegetes popular culture for his message. He uses a clip from a movie as a 'parable', or a sentimental story to explain God's 'feelings'. The trouble with this is, I don't believe the bible is the type of book, where we can convey it's essential truths while doing away with it's actual words.

If we want people to hear God, we must use His Word. If people will not hear the Word of God as it is given by God, then they are not going to hear our own artistic attempts.

When we are sick, we are careful to read the ingredients, and instructions on label on the doctors prescription. If we were prescribing a drug for a terminal patient, we wouldn't given them something they don't need, just because they don't want what they do need... and then call that compassion and relevancy! We would give them the cure that is relevant to their sickness! If they are indiffent to the cure, it is because they are not convinced of their need for it. This is the real problem, and an alternative narrative with reinvented characters in reinvented situations will not change their indifference to God's word.

Sinners cannot respond to the Gospel if it is disguised as something else. Evangelicals need to put away their pop culture subterfuge and just trust that God's word works in our generation jut as it has in every generation.

These are just my thoughts for consideration brother.

Blessings,

MC

C
CJaKfOrEsT Dec 24, 2008


chadster wrote:

Have we forgotten the words of the apostle about judging others? To his own master a man will stand or fall and STAND HE WILL!! God is the judge..why do we feel we need to do His job????

I am in the middle of listening to an audio version of this book (purchased legally ;-)), and have to admit that after getting over the initial shock of having God the Father present "Himself" as "African American Woman", I have to admit, for the most part, I have been satisfied with the explanations given within the book.

It would seem that, at the half way point (where I'm at now), the key issue is that we need to look beyond our misconceptions of God (for the principle character Mack, in the book, this was formed by his alcoholic Bible quoting, wife beating father, and his dealing with having his daughter abducted by a serial killer, in spite of both his, and his wife's faith in Christ), and our need to get down from "His throne", and entrust our life to what He defines as "good and evil", rather than our own, received from the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil".

I read in another review, quoted on this site:


Okay, it is only an allegory. But like Pilgrim's Progress, allegories contain deep truths. That is my problem. It is the author's low view of Scripture. For example, Mack is tied to a tree by his drunken, abusive father, who "beats Mack with a belt and Bible verses." The author reflects derisively in another spot that "nobody wanted God in a box, just in a book. Especially an expensive one bound in leather with gilt edges, or was that 'guilt' edges."

Meaning no disrespect from the one who penned these words (I'm not 100% sure who it was, but if I'm right, I am a little shocked, considering that he has experience around prison evangelism), but they read like those of someone who has little contact with sinners in the real world. I would find it incredibly difficult to number the amount of times that I have encountered "ex-Christians" who are so as a result of growing up under abusive (both physically and sexually) parents, who were either ministers and/or missionaries, in my limited street evangelism experience. It has been a great joy to be able to help some of them reconcile such an apparent inconsistency, while maintaining both the integrity of God, and purity of doctrine.

Several books have made an attempt at addressing these themes, but they tend to drift into much presumption (Rick Joyner's final quest comes to mind, with his implication that Paul was telling Joyner that he (Paul) had got it wrong, during his life, and how he (Joyner) could do life better), but so far I have not seen this kind of thing in the Shack. In fact, whenever it seems that the book is about to round this kind of corner, a twist is presented that sets it straight.

Having said all that, I'm only half way so far, so it is not inconceivable that I could be posting a retraction once I have finished.

L
Lonny Dec 24, 2008

I read The Shack on holiday and so I have to confess it was in a bit of a haze as I lay by a pool... However having given the ideas in the book some thought then I have a tendency to split my thoughts to both sides of the argument - I think if we can view it as a novel, a piece of fiction then it throws up some good and interesting points about how we understand God and that God is actually much wider, deeper, greater and simply "beyond" anything we can imagine - The Shack helped me remember that in that I was so surprised when "God" appeared as He was very different from my pre-concieved notions. That is a help to me and something i will remember. However there were some concerns in the book - especially some of the ideas about how God does not expect anything from us and He knows us totoally anyway then He knows what we will do before we do it and yet loves us anyway. Now in a sense this is true (and therefore liberating) but I also do believe that God does expect things from us - our love, our obedience, or devotion and so on. The youth in my church have been very excitied by the book and generally combined with their lack of biblical and doctrinal knowledge then my concern is that books like the Shack tie into an "experience" led view of Christianity which I believe to be little more than "froth" and unreality and a foundation in sand for when storms of life come.

The Shack needs to be read before judgement can be put against it but that does not imply total acceptance or total rejection. If treated as a work of fiction then there are aspects that can be helpfully used and aspects that can be rejected when held up to scripture as well. As so often in life it is not a 100% yes or no - but I would encourage the reading of The Shack - either through borrowing it and buying it - we need to be aware of what is going on out there in "Christian land" and making our own decisions.

L
Lowly Dec 24, 2008

Has anyone ever read "The Knowledge of the Holy," by Tozar? This is a powerful book. God Himself has revealed to us who He is. Jesus is the perfect reflection of the glory of God.
If we want to know His nature and character, it is seen in Christ Jesus and the word of God. Jesus said to us who would follow Him that it is given to us to know the mysteries of the Kingdom of God.
We are to seek, knock, and ask.

I have not read the book, so I am not judging it.

Our God is majestic, Omnipotent, Immutable....He wants us to have the knowledge that He is the Judge and that day is coming, a day of wrath and vengeance, and all men will stand before the judgment seat.

And yet, He is the Lamb, who purged us from our sins, and sanctified us to our Father, and has given us an inheritance with HIm. Who rescues us, who carries us in His loving arms. The Good Shepherd watching over us.

He discipines us to know what is in our hearts. I could go on and on, but I am talking to the choir.

I only say these things to say, Our God has given to us HIs word, His Son, and His Holy Spirit that we may come to the full knowledge of Him. He has revealed Himself. Everything that has ever happened to me in my life, the Lord has shown Himself to me who He is through His word. He is the great I Am.

Anytime I have been confused, broken, devastated, etc...........I have sought Him and He answered me.........

Please forgive me if I am being presumptuous about this book........

But when Jesus saved me He began the work......and I am whole heartedly cooperating with the Holy Spirit that He will finish the work. I want to grow up in the fullness of Christ, I desire that He would produce the fruit in me that is pleasing to my Heavenly Father. The Character and Nature of God are found in Christ, and I will spend my days pursuing to know Him.

Please again forgive me for using the word "I" so much, it is only an expression of my heart....it is not about me......

I only say these things to consider when you read the book............we need to have a good measuring stick..........

In His amazing love,
Lowly
------------------------------------
"Learn of Me for I am meek and lowly of heart..."

W
White_Stone Dec 24, 2008

The time God gives us is too precious to waste on fiction, [b]especially[/b] fiction that misrepresents Him. If I was reading a book and they represented God Almighty as a black woman, I would burn it!
______________________________
chadster,

Why is it that if anything doesn't line up exactly with our personal orthodoxy, we're the first in line picking up the stones and ready to bash and discredit...frankly, I find that very disturbing about the majority of the participants on this forum. Are we the only "righteous" ones in the earth??? Have we forgotten the words of the apostle about judging others? To his own master a man will stand or fall and STAND HE WILL!! God is the judge..why do we feel we need to do His job????

[b]John 7:24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.[/b]

We are instructed to use righteous judgment. I believe it has been used on this fictional work.
______________________________

Ruach34,

This trusting and walking is considerably more appealing to me and more sure than slurping up all teaching relative to the issues, as if thinking, 'if I get it now I will be prepared in the future for it.'

Very good point!
______________________________

MC,

Sinners cannot respond to the Gospel if it is disguised as something else. Evangelicals need to put away their pop culture subterfuge and just trust that God's word works in our generation jut as it has in every generation.

AMEN!!
______________________________

Bonnie,

If it carried the Truth of the Gospel, I don't believe it would have such popularity.

Amen and AMEN. . . Your comment says it all.

Years ago, I read 'Ben Hur.' Recently, I reread it and was disgusted with the way the author portrayed Jesus. It appears the Holy Spirit has been at work on my taste for recreational reading. The same as He is working on turning me against Hollywood movies. Watching a movie we have viewed countless times the other night and little things jumped out at my husband and I that we simply accepted previously (the movie is in the junk pile now).

chadster, Lord willing you will have the necessary time to rethink your opinions, just as He has given me that time for reflection and study.

We should all be aware that the time is at hand, He IS coming very soon. Praise Jesus.

Kind regards,
white stone

M
Miccah Dec 24, 2008

I posted this on a different thread about "The Shack". I believe it applies very well.



My suggestion is to stay far away from this book, especially new or weak believers. I can see nothing good coming from this book besides a greater falling away from the Truth.

L
Lonny Dec 24, 2008

Oh good grief! Time is too precious to waste on fiction? Lighten up!

Paul himself used his knowledge of books that weren't scripture when evangelizing so why shouldn't we? God can speak to us through a myriad of ways - not all of which are through the Bible - he speaks to me through nature, through the actions and attitudes of others, through worship, through sermons, through the fun that children have - I am not comparing them to God's Word as given to us in the Bible and I am not comparing The Shack to that either but God can still speak to us through it.

:-(

J
JoanM Dec 24, 2008

Proverbs 21:16 The man that [b][i]wandereth[/i][/b] out of the way of understanding shall remain in the congregation of the dead.

Should we wonder if imaginations lift themselves up against the [u][b]knowledge of God [/b][/u]? this particular imagination? against the knowledge of God?

Should we seek the dead on behalf of the living? Should a man not seek God?

Clear evidence it is revival or ruin.

M
Miccah Dec 24, 2008

Lonny, what heresy is acceptable for you and others to read?

H
HeartSong Dec 24, 2008

The Lord has left it to us to choose what we take in, be it for good, or be it for evil. If we rely upon our human intellect, it is likely that we will choose wrong, for we do not know the truth of the matter.

It is like the eating of food. For years we were unaware of the poisons that were resident in the fruit - pesticides that were tasteless, but have been slowly poisoning our systems none the less.

We must ask the Lord to show us the way, for only He knows the truth of the matter and will keep us unto life.

L
Lonny Dec 24, 2008

Good question Miccah - I will actually read all manner of books and poetry which might not strictly be in line with orthodox Christian thought - however I will do that either to understand what the world is saying about life or to challenge my own way of thinking. That way I try to ensure that I don't get stale or hidebound and also to ensure that i am not giving answers to questions that had stopped being asked some ten plus years ago. How about you?

In terms of the analogy of eating food - everyone knows that the odd burger is truly delicious! :-)

H
HeartSong Dec 24, 2008

In terms of the analogy of eating food - everyone knows that the odd burger is truly delicious!

What "tastes" good is not always what is good for you. In fact, often it is the things that "taste" good that are the most lethal for the enemy knows that you can be trapped by appealing to your senses.

Through "greed for gold," or the desire to make more money, Satan manipulates one person to add a little "flavor", knowing that the "product" will be more desirable to another. Through "lust" for the added "flavor", another will buy this product because it "tastes" good. Invariably, this added "flavor" is full of poison, and is usually addicting.

It is a cycle designed to destroy both the buyer and the seller.

M
Miccah Dec 24, 2008

Lonny wrote:


How about you?


Lonny, I have read "The Shack", hence I feel that it is ok to warn against it.

Being past the spiritual milk stage in my walk, I am able to read books as such, with MUCH prayer before, during and after, in order to increase my understanding and knowledge to fight against such things.

But I would never recommend to people to read this garbage without those people first being lead by the Holy Spirit. If the Spirit is leading you to read a/this book, then one should read it, but this is usually not the case.

To recommend something that you KNOW is wrong and literally breaks the Second Commandment is inexcusable

Maybe you have heard this before and is a good analogy to use in situations like this. The best wayto combat heresy is to study and know the Truth. This Truth is given to us through the Spirit of God and through the scriptures.

Another good lessen about what is acceptable or not can be obtained through the observence of what the "main stream church" deems acceptable or what they embrace. If it is embraced by Laodicea, more then likely it should be thrown away.

"The Shack" IS embraced by Laodicea.

P
poet Dec 25, 2008

A.W. Tozer said: “wrong ideas about God are not only the fountain from which the polluted waters of idolatry flow; they are themselves idolatrous. The idolater simply imagines things about God and acts as if they were true.”

I Just read "the shack" last week and wrote a position paper based on this book.
I found more than 50 statements in the book that misrepresent God, who he is and his character and nature.
My pastor recommended that I read it because he is getting his master at NW University; and it was required reading for one of his classes.
I just gave him the paper to check out on monday, I'll find out what he thinks after christmas.
I found it odd that some students in his class found many fundamental issues with the book and others noticed less.
This book is poison, and is so diabolical as to deny Christ, because it denies the Christ of the bible; of which the book says Mack's pre-conditioning or pre-conceived ideas about God are wrong, when we all as rational people get our ideas about who God is by HIS Word.

Believe me when I say this, our churches today are so ignorant of the God of the bible that they are not able to discern or recoginize whether the god of the shack is any different from the God of the bible.

I'll give you an example of a pastor I used to sit under, who is an experienced based teacher.
he would say things like don't put God in a box; when he was about to make a statement that we would probably not agree with. why wouldnt we agree with what he was about to say I ask?
Because his next statement was going to say something about God that wasn't found in scripture, or contradicted one of the fundamentals thats why.
Pre-conditioning, pre-conceived ideas, don't put God in a Box... ohh better yet, don't be a Pharisee, I had that one used on me too, only because we question someones teachings but we try to compare what someone teaches with Scripture, not by Storys, or subjective testamonies, the Bereans were commended, and we should always compare what someone teaches with scripture.

Even if an Angel from heaven preaches a gospel other than the one we have preached let him be eternally occursed.

My pastor said that there are even churches out there that are using "the shack" as a sunday school teaching tool.....
Not as a discernment tool either....
Please stay away from this book, do not recommend this book, do not promote this book.

C
CJaKfOrEsT Dec 25, 2008


poet wrote:
I Just read "the shack" last week and wrote a position paper based on this book.
I found more than 50 statements in the book that misrepresent God, who he is and his character and nature.

Hi Poet.

I am still plugging away at this book, and so am yet to form a concrete opinion about it. I must admit that I began this book, expecting nothing but "humanist junk", especially in light of its mainstream success, but have been pleasantly surprised. I would be interested to read your paper on it, especially the "50 statements in the book that misrepresent God".


This book is poison, and is so diabolical as to deny Christ, because it denies the Christ of the bible; of which the book says Mack's pre-conditioning or pre-conceived ideas about God are wrong, when we all as rational people get our ideas about who God is by HIS Word.

So, if I am reading you right, Mack was right to believe that God is a cruel task master, who does not, in fact love him, at best, and is powerless to help him, at worst? You believe that God is someone who justifies alcoholic wife beating, as long as the person doing so is a student of the Bible? You believe that God is someone who is waiting with a rod to beat us every time we get out theology slightly wrong?

If you put those statements, in the book, in their proper context, you'd see that this is exactly what you are saying, when you make the above statements. Brother, I have personally met many young believers whose parents demand that their children "honour their parents", while ignoring the command to not "provoke their children to wrath". I watched one such "man of God", who held a masters degree in theology from one to the most respected Evangelical Bible Colleges in Australia, slap his son across the back of the head, for asking why he had to eat the crust of the bread, which he didn't like.

The sad thing is, many Christians have deified "the Bible", at the expense of God (Tozer spoke of this also, btw). The Shack is making an attempt at addressing this.


Believe me when I say this, our churches today are so ignorant of the God of the bible that they are not able to discern or recoginize whether the god of the shack is any different from the God of the bible.

The same can be said about any book, regardless of the best intentions of the author. In fact, the above mention youth walked away from reading Leonard Ravenhill's "Why Revival Tarries" being convinced that his best efforts to meet up with God's "demanded obedience" were unable to achieve righteousness. I'm sure that Ravenhill would turn in his grave to be accused of promoting salvation by "self righteousness", and yet this was the impression that this young man walked away with. So, would you say that we should ban Ravenhill also?


Even if an Angel from heaven preaches a gospel other than the one we have preached let him be eternally occursed.

Please present how the Gospel presented in The Shack differs from the Scriptural one? I'm yet to see it.

My pastor said that there are even churches out there that are using "the shack" as a sunday school teaching tool.....
Not as a discernment tool either....

Naturally, any attempt at replacing the Scriptures with any book, regardless of its Scriptural integrity, is a dangerous one. But, then again, where do we draw the line with this? Do we ban illustrations in preaching, only permitting the Scriptural quotations? The Shack is intended as an allegory. It's purpose is to draw attention to certain Scriptural principles, not to establish doctrine, itself.

Please stay away from this book, do not recommend this book, do not promote this book.

I am actually more concerned about the backlash against this book, based primarily on its popularity. What if God were to allow such a book to become popular, in order to offend our theological intellect? What if His target is the "Laodicean church", believing itself to be rich in its theology, having "progressed from milk to meat" (Heb 5:12-14)? What if His desire is that we leave "the principles of the doctrine of Christ..not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God", in order to "let us go on unto perfection" (Heb 6:1)?

(Oh, I'm gonna get some grief over this post...I can just smell it) :-)

K
Koheleth Dec 25, 2008


Lonny wrote:
Oh good grief! Time is too precious to waste on fiction? Lighten up!

I think the question remains, in light of the death of Christ, how much we should lighten up. Peter told us to "be sober, be vigilant".

I am not comparing them to God's Word as given to us in the Bible and I am not comparing The Shack to that either but God can still speak to us through it.

I agree that God can and does speak to someone seeking light by using errant sources. But for a person that already has light (spiritual light meaning more understanding of the truths about God), I do not believe that God will "speak" (reveal truth) through these types of materials. The presentations of God in The Shack may be an interesting exercise for Christians to think about, but will definitely never be God "speaking" unless we believe that God is choosing to use Bible-contradicting statements and perspectives to speak. If that were the case, God would be guilty of duplicity and confusion. The God of the Bible never has revealed himself as deceptive in that way.

This discussion is locked.

Archived
1 of 27 posts