[biblereader]

This morning, in Sunday School, one of the leaders of our class gave the book, The Shack, to another member, saying it was "wonderful, a good read".I said I disagreed with what the Shack said,, and didn't like it.
She shot me a dirty look, but, oh well.
Well, I was reading it today, the Shack, and several odd things came up in theauthor's representation of the way Christianity is, in HIS interpretation, or, may I
say MIS-interpretation. So, I looked up reviews of The Shack, and found out that Wm. Paul Young,
the author, is a Universalist. In case you aren't familiar with their doctrine, like I wasn't,
here's what the author believes: the theological doctrine that all people will eventually be saved
even after death, and that eventually satan will be forgiven by God! It's a scary, unGodly
anti-bible religion, and The Shack represents Universalism through and through.
If you read the book, please be careful, and PLEASE read this first:
Click on this link:
http://theshackreview.com/content/Th...rterReview.pdf

Excerpts from the review:
Christian universalism (also known as universal reconciliation) argues that love is
the supreme attribute of God that trumps all others. Those who refuse him now will be
given another chance to repent after they die. Thus unbelieving humanity, and fallen
angels and the Devil himself, will one day in hell repent and be delivered from it and be
admitted into heaven.

Also PY clearly disassociates God with the punishment of evil. In his crucial
chapter on judgment (ch. 11) Mack acknowledges that he believes that God “will
condemn most to an eternity of torment, away from his presence and apart from his
love.” But the story proceeds to show that Mack is wrong in believing this! When he is
asked to choose three of his children to send to hell, he protests that he could not act as
judge and send any of his children to hell. He is willing to be “tortured for eternity”
instead of them. It isn’t about his children’s “performance; it was about his love for
them” (163). At this point Mack is told that he sounds like Jesus, that he is loving as
Jesus loves (163). The chapter concludes with Papa affirming that “judgment is not about
destruction, but about setting things right” (169). Many biblical statements affirm that
God indeed does have anger or wrath against sin, that he judges and that he does punish
the ungodly (note condemnation in John 3:16-17; and in many places in Romans, chs. 1-
5; cf. 2:2-16; 3:5-6; 5:9).
3) There is an incomplete picture of the enormity of sin and evil. Satan as the
great deceiver and instigator of the temptation to sin goes unmentioned in PY’s
discussion of the fall (134-137). In so doing the complete picture of explaining the
enormity of evil in history and in our own day goes unmet. The evil one who was so real
to Jesus (Matt. 4:1-11) and to Paul the Apostle (Eph. 6:11ff.) is apparently unreal to those
of universal reconciliation.

[biblereader]

I had to do a reply, so I could get notifications on any replies to this.

[biblereader]

More commentary on The Shack:

http://www.thebereancall.org/node/6994

....
So, they are demeaning God, they are presenting a false picture of God. An author who writes that, he ought to tremble. He is going to stand before this God that he misrepresented, stand before Him in judgment, and the people who loves it, they will stand before God in judgment as well.

Tim Challie has written an excellent review of the Shack here:

http://www.challies.com/archives/boo...ws/a-review-of...

[CKG]

The Shack's Wayne Jacobsen Resonates with Contemplative and Emerging Writers

Category: * The Shack
Source: Editors at Lighthouse Trails

William Paul Young is the official author of The Shack, but Wayne Jacobsen is one of its editors. According to a New York Times article, Jacobsen spent 16 months helping to rewrite the first draft. This would leave the logical conclusion that Jacobsen had some significant influence on the final outcome of the book. And with that in mind, readers need to be aware that Jacobsen is a proponent of emerging and contemplative books and authors. It's an important thing to know because Christian figures are heralding the book, helping it to remain on the New York Times Best Seller list. Those that understand this book--its obvious and its not so obvious messages--know that it's important to issue a warning. And the fact that popular Christian authors like Eugene Peterson (The Message) and Gayle Erwin (Calvary Chapel speaker and author of The Jesus Style) endorse the book means that unsuspecting, well-intentioned Christians will buy the book, and if they follow the advice at the end of the book, will buy other copies of the book and give them away to friends.

To read the entire article:
http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com

[CKG]

Originally Posted by CKG

To read the entire article:
http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com

Try http://lighthousetrailsresearch.com/blog/

[Forrest]

The following is an article (critique) written by my dear friend, Pastor Jim Owen regarding a recent Novel, “The Shack” by Paul Young. It should be very natural for the Christian to have a deep abiding love for absolute truth which is found in God’s written word. And we should be troubled by gross error.

Introduction

The theme of this Christian novel is forgiveness. The story centers around the abduction and murder of a man’s child while the family was on a camp out. Through a series of unavoidable circumstances the father’s little girl mysteriously vanishes and the police believe that it has all the earmarks of a wanted serial killer who has alluded them for years.

Mark, the father, not only grieves for his daughter, but cannot forgive himself for letting her be taken. His hatred for her abductor is fierce. Throughout the years he is so consumed by his emotions that he experiences a “great sadness”.

The only thing that rescues the father is his response to a mysterious note he suspects is from God. The note takes him back to “the shack” that was on the property on the camp site.

It is there that Mack meets all three persons of the Godhead and one of God’s angels. God the Father appears as a black woman; Jesus as a Hebrew man; God the Holy Spirit comes to him as Sarayu, an Asian woman. The angel is also a woman. Each of these individuals plays a part in Mack’s reclamation. As a result Mack finds forgiveness for himself and for the murderer.

“The Shack” is the latest attempt by an author to make God popular with the Church today, a Church that has in large measure left the authority of God’s word. To make God acceptable by man’s means when God’s powerful words have not done so seems the height of arrogance or at best blindness. This is another indicator that the Church is being weaned away from the word of God.

I will make just a few comments about what I found in the book that is either the most objectionable—or the most impressive to this reader.

The Godhead

One doubts if the old men of God who were so faithful to God’s word and who held God’s holiness in such high esteem could even imagine casting God the Father and God the Holy Spirit as women.

My first question is: Why did the author think this was necessary? Could it possibly be that use of a male father would be unacceptable to a good many readers of Christian novels today since many of them are “modern” women?

This might especially be true in light of some of the dialog. For instance, Papa, a “female” Father reacts to Mack by first saying, “My but aren’t you getting uppity an’ all. Give a man an inch and he thinks he’s a ruler.” Later she reacts to him by shaking her head and walking away while muttering: “Men! Such idiots sometimes.” (Page 192.)

Not only does that not reflect the attitude of the Father, but one can only imagine what the response would be by the women readers if the Father was made to utter: “Women! Such idiots sometimes.” These along with other examples could be given to illustrate how “hip” (read worldly) much of the dialog is when the members of the Godhead speak. (Pages.104-106, 108, 191-192.)

But it is Only a Novel, right?

Yes it is only a Novel. But when it is a “Christian novel” it is bound by the truth of Scripture. How can it teach truth if in the process of telling the story it abandons the very source of truth? Man’s best attempt to describe the relationship between the members of the Godhead will always fall short of reality when one leaves God’s source of final authority and wisdom—the Bible. Thus, those who are familiar with the Bible are (should be) shocked at the liberties the author takes. Man’s attempt to make God more relational usually fails and instead it becomes cheap and worldly.

Some Good in the book

As usual there are some good parts in this book. First, on pages 197 & 198 the author does mention the essence of the Christian life. In contrast to keeping a list of rules he says “Life and living is in Him” speaking of Christ. A second area of strength is found in chapter 14. The chapter deals with the believer’s relationship to God’s freedom contrasted to the demands of the Law.

Conclusion & Caution

I could mention other objections, but in short the one who is truly in need of infallible truth would be better served going to the Bible. It is there that God offers the power to change lives for His glory through Christ. “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” (Hebrews 4:12).

“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works” (2 Timothy 3:16-17).

[Gord]

Remember folks, it's a fictional story. Enjoy it for what it is, a fictional story period.

It is not some great doctrinal exposition by some evangelist, that we all have to start ripping apart because it doesn't align with your particular theology.

We'd have to have Brandon open a Fictional Doctrine forum.

[Rolando]

Originally Posted by Gord

Remember folks, it's a fictional story. Enjoy it for what it is, a fictional story period.

It is not some great doctrinal exposition by some evangelist, that we all have to start ripping apart because it doesn't align with your particular theology.

We'd have to have Brandon open a Fictional Doctrine forum.

You want a fictional doctrine forum? Perhaps you should go somewhere else to get it. Some of us here come here to search for the truth, not fairy tales! One thing is to exposed these unfruitful work of darkness, but another is to support them!


"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them." (Ephesians 5:11).

[Luke]

There is a fictional doctrine forum. It's called "Bible Versions" and it's on the FFF.

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by Luke

There is a fictional doctrine forum. It's called "Bible Versions" and it's on the FFF.

This is why I like brother Luke so much, among other things, he's sharp as a tack and can see through brick walls

Grace and peace

Tony