Christian book recommendation - The Shack

[9Marksfan]

Interesting, and Xel had close encounters with a demonic presence as well. Maybe because I haven't been that 'close' to cults, demons, witches etc. I don't recognize the 'darkness' like you do. AK, MF, do you have similar past experiences?

If by MF you mean me, no, but I have read a fair bit and I believe that discerning of spirits is one of the gifts God has given me.

[Gulah Papyrus]

If by MF you mean me, no, but I have read a fair bit and I believe that discerning of spirits is one of the gifts God has given me.

I do mean you, brother....hmmm, now we're getting somewhere. So when you guys/gals read The Shack you immediately see a present darkness...so you see it as a 'classic case' of evil spirits at work? Like, 'oh, I've seen this dog and pony show before, nice try Satan' type of thing?

[kayte]

I think what is most interesting is that although Voltaire could technically have written it (given your proviso) it would have been impossible for anyone to have mistaken it for a Christian book in the days of Voltaire. Even with the Christian language, people in the church would have had every alarm bell ringing... because generally people were far more schooled.

I was shocked, on Sunday, at my church to discover that the kids I've inherited from Sunday school haven't had any form of catechism. They're coming up on eleven, and they don't know the basics of their faith... they have some stories from the Old Testament, they know a bit about Jesus. But when you consider that kids that age used to be schooled on the Westminster confession, or that when I was seven it would have been unusual not to know the various creeds, you have to wonder when on earth kids are supposed to learn about topics like sin, Christ's sacrifice, the Second Coming, etc.

You know the one kid in my class, besides my son, who definitely I would consider to know Jesus was very upset, because she's been convinced the world is going to be swallowed by a black hole? Her Christian parents never told her that God is in control of everything from the beginning to the end, that the world won't end in 2012, but only when God says so, and that He will defend and protect His people whatever happens.

The Shack couldn't have been written in any other century than this. It's only our generation that is so unschooled.

Sorry if it sounds harsh, but there it is.

Harsh or not, it's true.
I've wondered about the lack of education among Christians because it is why so many are easily led into false teachings. To me, the general acceptance and 'wowiness' over The Shack is an indication of just how bad things are. (His people parish for lack of knowledge--- ring a bell?)

1 Peter 2:1 Therefore, laying aside all malice, all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and all evil speaking, 2 as newborn babes, desire the pure milk of the word, that you may grow thereby, 3 if indeed you have tasted that the Lord is gracious.

The Shack is deceitful... it needs to be laid aside. The Shack does embrace and present unscriptural ideals while claiming to be 'christian'... I can easily place it in the category of 'evil speaking' and see that it needs to be laid aside.

The above verse talks about how we are to desire the pure milk of the word, that we my grow. The word 'pure' is an important one. Common sense tells us that you don't feed a baby almost pure milk... milk with most of the right things in it, but just a drop or two of arsenic. You'd be pretty livid if your neighbor made a cake using all the finest, freshest ingredients and then dropped a 1/2 table spoon of dog poo in it and served it to your children. When you voice your strong objections to this and your neighbor is puzzled why you're so upset, because they feel that your children's bodies will sort out the good from the bad, would you find that to be an acceptable answer? I don't think so and I don't think the Lord does either.

The god of The Shack is not the God of the Bible. The god of The Shack is indeed a new age sort of god that will come to each person in whatever way that person is comfortable with (papa as a woman, because Mack would be more comfortable with that.) The God of the Bible doesn't alter Himself to make us comfortable. He's quite okay with our discomfort, actually. God doesn't change Himself for us... He changes us for Himself.

Young is blatantly anti-organized-Christianity. Admittedly, I giggle about those kind of statements because the alternative is what? Disorganized Christianity? If The Shack is an indication, then yes... that's what Young likes. The Jesus in The Shack says that He didn't come to 'make them Christians'. Really? Jesus didn't come to make followers/disciples? That's funny. I remember a few times when Jesus said 'follow Me'. And of course the little matter of Him claiming to be The Way, The Truth and The Life. That's awfully narrow and organized of Him!

The Shack struck me as so disrespectful of God and stripped Him of His holiness that it has no place in my home other than the trash can.

The truth is that God does desire an intimate relationship with each one of us... but on His terms... not ours. And that bit of dog poo in the book ruins the entire cake.

[Athanasius]

When I was a witch, I knew lots of practising pagans who worshipped "Sophia, the goddess of wisdom," claiming that it was a female aspect of Jahveh that the Christian church had supressed. (Because we're all such evil patriarchs, obviously.)

In the book under discussion, "the Shack" (I don't have a copy any more, so I can't immediately reference the passage, but if you've read it you should find what I mean) there is a scene of judgement, with "Sophia" in charge. The whole resonance of that passage reminded me of nothing more or less than tarot... I used to read tarot, so I'm not sure whether most Christians would pick up on it or not. But the "sophia" character seemed modelled on a major arcana tarot card, "justice", rather than anyone in the Bible. That just jumped out at me... not sure if anyone else has seen it, but I don't know how many other people on this forum studied tarot.

Well, the whole scene with Sophia revolves around justice and Sophia inviting Mack to judge God and the world. It's chapter 11 of the book, page 151-169 (I re-read the book yesterday for this thread). The revelation that Sophia is the personification of Papa's wisdom comes in chapter 12, I believe. I could get the exact reference though needless to say it's there.

[Athanasius]

Interesting, and Xel had close encounters with a demonic presence as well. Maybe because I haven't been that 'close' to cults, demons, witches etc. I don't recognize the 'darkness' like you do. AK, MF, do you have similar past experiences?

Well, having those 'encounters' certainly allow one to see more clearly when such influences are at work. Aside from that, though, I would chalk up most of my concern to the gift of discernment.

[thepenitent]

Harsh or not, it's true.
I've wondered about the lack of education among Christians because it is why so many are easily led into false teachings. To me, the general acceptance and 'wowiness' over The Shack is an indication of just how bad things are. (His people parish for lack of knowledge--- ring a bell?)

1 Peter 2:1 Therefore, laying aside all malice, all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and all evil speaking, 2 as newborn babes, desire the pure milk of the word, that you may grow thereby, 3 if indeed you have tasted that the Lord is gracious.

The Shack is deceitful... it needs to be laid aside. The Shack does embrace and present unscriptural ideals while claiming to be 'christian'... I can easily place it in the category of 'evil speaking' and see that it needs to be laid aside.

The above verse talks about how we are to desire the pure milk of the word, that we my grow. The word 'pure' is an important one. Common sense tells us that you don't feed a baby almost pure milk... milk with most of the right things in it, but just a drop or two of arsenic. You'd be pretty livid if your neighbor made a cake using all the finest, freshest ingredients and then dropped a 1/2 table spoon of dog poo in it and served it to your children. When you voice your strong objections to this and your neighbor is puzzled why you're so upset, because they feel that your children's bodies will sort out the good from the bad, would you find that to be an acceptable answer? I don't think so and I don't think the Lord does either.

The god of The Shack is not the God of the Bible. The god of The Shack is indeed a new age sort of god that will come to each person in whatever way that person is comfortable with (papa as a woman, because Mack would be more comfortable with that.) The God of the Bible doesn't alter Himself to make us comfortable. He's quite okay with our discomfort, actually. God doesn't change Himself for us... He changes us for Himself.

Young is blatantly anti-organized-Christianity. Admittedly, I giggle about those kind of statements because the alternative is what? Disorganized Christianity? If The Shack is an indication, then yes... that's what Young likes. The Jesus in The Shack says that He didn't come to 'make them Christians'. Really? Jesus didn't come to make followers/disciples? That's funny. I remember a few times when Jesus said 'follow Me'. And of course the little matter of Him claiming to be The Way, The Truth and The Life. That's awfully narrow and organized of Him!

The Shack struck me as so disrespectful of God and stripped Him of His holiness that it has no place in my home other than the trash can.

The truth is that God does desire an intimate relationship with each one of us... but on His terms... not ours. And that bit of dog poo in the book ruins the entire cake.

Best post yet on this thread. Great job!.......................................

[apothanein kerdos]

Interesting, and Xel had close encounters with a demonic presence as well. Maybe because I haven't been that 'close' to cults, demons, witches etc. I don't recognize the 'darkness' like you do. AK, MF, do you have similar past experiences?

Not really. I've never been a part of the occult.

This is why I generally take such a relaxed view toward fiction. I look at Harry Potter and go, "Eh, it doesn't claim to be Christian so what do you expect?" Others who have experiences with the occult, however, will have a completely different view. And you know what? I respect their viewpoints - because of their experience, they have a lot of advice to give on things of that nature.

[Gulah Papyrus]

Not really. I've never been a part of the occult.

This is why I generally take such a relaxed view toward fiction. I look at Harry Potter and go, "Eh, it doesn't claim to be Christian so what do you expect?" Others who have experiences with the occult, however, will have a completely different view. And you know what? I respect their viewpoints - because of their experience, they have a lot of advice to give on things of that nature.

Oh, I wasn't looking for for a reason to call 'paranoid' or anything, I just noticed a possible pattern. It would make complete sense that someone with that experience would have a keener(is that a word?) 'eye' than I.

Anyway, I have come away with a lot of good info and advice this last week or so, and I'm grateful to you all. Thanks.

I still wouldn't try to turn anyone away from reading it if they were already planning on reading it, but I won't be suggesting it either.

[TrophyofGrace]

Interesting thread.

I'd never heard of this book before I saw this thread, but based on what I've read here it's not something I'd plan on reading because it sounds to me like it profanes the very holiness of God.

[daughter]

Well, I'm glad the thread has helped people think through the issues and come to some sensible conclusions.

Gulah... I was just thinking, earlier today in fact, about the gift of discernment, and how we get it.

You know, I know plenty of Christians who are very easily decieved who have similar backgrounds to me in the occult. Just because someone has been in the occult, it doesn't give them any greater insight.

The only thing that gives you insight, is God. You know, James says, "if anyone lacks wisdom, let them ask of God, and He will give it to them..." He wants to give His children gifts, so go ahead and ask! And the other verse that came to mind was where Paul tells Timothy to study to show himself approved. Seeking the Scriptures, studying them, praying for God to send His gifts of wisdom... that's how you can grow in discerment. Look how God blessed Solomon (even though Solomon was a sinner) because he simply asked?

Don't put yourself down - God wants to bless you. Ask and you shall receive!

[Emanate]

Well, if I write a fictional novel about Jesus Christ coming back to earth and fighting a resurgence of dinosaurs, it might prove a point, be entertaining, make people laugh, and encourage them; but it's still the wrong thing to write.

Though there is an existential element to Christianity, we must never forget our first Love, which is Christ. Anything that bring Him dishonor, even if we find encouragement in it, should be tossed out as filthy.

I used this analogy (that I stole from a pastor) in another thread:

When I marry my fiance once day, I may come home to her and just decide to display my love. I'll look her deep in the eyes, wrap my arms around her, and declare how much I love her. I'll tell her how she's the most beautiful blue-eyed, blond I've ever known - in fact, she's the most beautiful woman I've ever known.

Problem with that though - she has brown eyes and brown hair. No matter how much love I was showing her in the "here and now," if I describe her incorrectly no amount of passion is going to make up for my mistake.

So if The Shack presents a view of Christ that - though encouraging - is ultimately inaccurate, then we should toss it out (depending on how wrong it is).

Ultimately, the Jesus (and God) of The Shack is drastically different from the one presented in Scripture. What Young calls "Trinitarian" is actually modalism. The view he presents is antithetical to the God we see in Scriptures.

Not trying to be negative, just honest.

In this case, we should also throw out Narnia.

[apothanein kerdos]

In this case, we should also throw out Narnia.

That's non-sequitur.

Narnia is meant to be a child's story that metaphorically describes the Christian story. Aslan is a "Christ-like" character, meaning he's not supposed to represent Christ in every way. He simply points to Christ. Lewis doesn't display any of the characters as a reality, but instead uses them in an analogous way to point toward the reality in this world. Lewis wrote a parable and did not intend for it to sync up - he didn't intent to teach Christian doctrine, but merely to teach the basics of the Christian story.

Had Young done this, then it wouldn't have been a big deal. Fact is, he didn't. I even had Doug Pagitt, a well-known Christian author, ask me if the story was real. So if someone who is educated and is a leader in the emergent movement had difficulty drawing the line between fact and fiction on the novel, then the case for, "Oh, this is a parable" utterly fails.

[Athanasius]

Had Young done this, then it wouldn't have been a big deal. Fact is, he didn't. I even had Doug Pagitt, a well-known Christian author, ask me if the story was real. So if someone who is educated and is a leader in the emergent movement had difficulty drawing the line between fact and fiction on the novel, then the case for, "Oh, this is a parable" utterly fails.

Oh geez, I thought I was a dummie for having to Google to see whether or not The Shack was based off a true story. If Doug Pagitt had to ask you, that makes me feel better

[Prufrock]

In this case, we should also throw out Narnia.

That's non-sequitur.

Right. It is indeed a non-sequitur. We should throw out Narnia for other reasons.

[9Marksfan]

It is indeed a non-sequitur. We should throw out Narnia for other reasons.

Such as??...........