Here’s an old post reposted. (Greg Rhodea)
————————————–
Hello All:
Some of you may be familiar with the book The Shack, by William P. Young. It has become an exceedingly popular and “trendy” Christian book, and many Christians are reading it, recomending it, and claiming to have been transformed by it. Right now it is the #5 overall best selling book on Amazon.com, and #1 best selling religious book. There is also much controversy concerning this book within the church at large, and so for these reasons combined, I read it this last Thursday on the way down to Dave’s wedding.
The verdict? Two big thumbs down.
It’s unfortunate, because I think this is a book that could have been good. It packs an emotional punch, and some of it is very biblical, very inspiring, and very helpful. However, much of it is not.
Dr. Al Mohler, president of Southern Seminary and a leading evangelical Christian says it contains “undiluted heresy,” is “subversive,” “seductive,” and demands a revision of Christianity.
I agree. While much of this book is good, there is simply too much that is false for use to recommend it in good conscience. What’s that about the best lies containing a bit of truth?
I’ll give you a few quick examples, and then some links for you to investigate further.
#1 Trinitarian Heresy
The book features a man named Mack spending a weekend in a “shack” with the Trinity. God the Father is portrayed as an African American woman named “Papa,” Jesus is a Jewish man, and the Holy Spirit is a Asian woman named “Sarayu.” Apart from the obvious problems with God the Father and God the Spirit being portrayed as women (or any human, for that matter), the book goes even farther astray. I think the single greatest danger and problem with this book is that most of the substance of the book consistes of the author putting words in God’s mouth that may or not be based on Scripture (plenty of both, more of the latter). So God the Father (Papa), says this on page 99: “When we spoke ourself into human existence as the Son of God, we became fully human…” On page 192, Papa again says: “in him (Jesus) we are now fully human…” This is heresy. God the Father and God the Father did not become human…only God the Son did. This may seem like a small issue, but it is really huge, and sets the stage for rampant misunderstandings of the Trinity and develop further in that paragraph and through the rest of the book.
The book also contains false teaching regarding the workings of the Trinity. The Bible portrays God the Son as submissive (yet equal) to God the Father (“Not my will, but yours,” etc). However, this is not what Papa says in the book. It is claimed that the Trinity is a “circle of relationship” with no hierarchy among them. Jesus says on page 145, “That’s the beauty of my relationship with Abba and Sarayu. Wew are indeed submitted to one another and have always been so and alway will be. Papa is as much subimitted to me as I to him, or Sarayu to me, or Papa to her. Submission is not about authority and it is not obedience; it is all about relationships of love and respect. In fact, we are submitted to you in the same way.” Mack then questions how this can be and how God could submit to him. Jesus answers: “Because we want you to join us in our circle of relationship. I don’t want slaves to my will; I want brother sand sisters who will share life with me.” So God the Father is submitted to God the Son, and both are somehow submitted to us as humans. The book goes on to explain that all authority and roles are because of sin and are evil. How does this fly when compared with Scripture?
#2 Incomplete Picture of God
Missing or vastly downplayed in this book are God’s righteousnes and Holiness. So when Mack asks God on page 119 “aren’t you the one spilling out great bowls of wrath and throwing people into a burning lake of fire?” and “Honestly, don’t you enjoy punishing those who disappoint you,” she (God) answers: “I am not who you think I am, Mackenzie. I don’t need to punish people for sin. Sin is its own punishment, devouring you from the inside. It’s not my purpose to punish it; it’s my joy to cure it.” Now certainly part of that is true, but it also ignores some pretty compelling chunks of Scripture.
At this point, I am given to frustration, because there is simply so much that is wrong with this book and I don’t have to go into any more detail. There’s no clear communication of salvation, the author dances around Uninversalism, nothing but contempt is expressed for the instutution of the Church, and when God finally gets around to dealing with the protagonist’s core complaint, about why his little girl was murdered, Jesus really drops the ball and says that the girl’s death “Was no plan of Papa’s.”
If you are in any way interested in hearing more about this book, check out one of the two links below. This guys do a better job of dealing with the book than me.
Text Link: Dr. Al Mohler
http://www.albertmohler.com/2010/01/27/the-shack-the-missing-art-of-evangelical-discernment/
Audio Link: Dr. Al Mohler
Dr. Mohler devotes the second two thirds of his radio program dealing with this book. His commentary is brilliant, and you should listen. When it starts playing, skip ahead to minute 11, that’s when he starts dealing with the book. The relevent section is about 20 minutes long.
http://www.albertmohler.com/2008/04/11/a-look-at-the-shack-3/
Video Link: Mark Driscoll
Mark is the pastor of Mars Hills church in Seattle, and an awesome guy. This video is 8 minutes long.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pK65Jfny70Y
Later,
G
September 8th, 2010 | Category: Uncategorized | Leave a comment