Christian book recommendation - The Shack

[Prufrock]

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

I appreciate your question and will answer it in the fullness of time. I do not wish to derail this thread by a detailed discussion of a book other than The Shack. In brief, I am referring to mythological, very pagan elements that were absolutely diabolical, and of which Lewis, as a premier expert on mythology, was obviously aware.

[Athanasius]

I appreciate your question and will answer it in the fullness of time. I do not wish to derail this thread by a detailed discussion of a book other than The Shack. In brief, I am referring to mythological, very pagan elements that were absolutely diabolical, and of which Lewis, as a premier expert on mythology, was obviously aware.

By all means, please create another thread as you've interested us

[Gulah Papyrus]

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

This argument that a parable could never be mistaken for a true story doesn't seem to hold much water.

The Parable of the...

Good Samaritan
Rich Fool
Barren Fig Tree
Prodigal Son
Dishonest Manager
Persistent Widow
Rich Young Ruler
Lazarus and the Rich Man

...could all be based on true stories...right?

[Athanasius]

This argument that a parable could never be mistaken for a true story doesn't seem to hold much water.

The Parable of the...

Good Samaritan
Rich Fool
Barren Fig Tree
Prodigal Son
Dishonest Manager
Persistent Widow
Rich Young Ruler
Lazarus and the Rich Man

...could all be based on true stories...right?

Well, it was apothanein who brought up that point so you'll have to ask him

[9Marksfan]

By all means, please create another thread as you've interested us

I second that. ................

[9Marksfan]

This argument that a parable could never be mistaken for a true story doesn't seem to hold much water.

The Parable of the...

Good Samaritan
Rich Fool
Barren Fig Tree
Prodigal Son
Dishonest Manager
Persistent Widow
Rich Young Ruler
Lazarus and the Rich Man

...could all be based on true stories...right?

No - only the last one, as the man is named.

[Prufrock]

By all means, please create another thread as you've interested us

Let me pray about that, okay? Starting a thread for the express purpose of exposing or critiquing another Christian is not my style. Lewis made a great contribution to Christian literature, and I have very close friends whose interest in Christ was piqued by reading Mere Christianity. But the Narnia books were not, to put it charitably, Lewis at his best. I'll start the thread after I become a full-fledged, grown-up member, which will be Sunday, I think; I want to have access to PMs, because questions might emerge that I don't want to address publicly. (About Narnia, I hasten to add!) In fact, this reply would be a PM if such were available.

Now back to the subject of the thread.....

[apothanein kerdos]

This argument that a parable could never be mistaken for a true story doesn't seem to hold much water.

The Parable of the...

Good Samaritan
Rich Fool
Barren Fig Tree
Prodigal Son
Dishonest Manager
Persistent Widow
Rich Young Ruler
Lazarus and the Rich Man

...could all be based on true stories...right?

Two things:

1) They come from Jesus, so if they point back to Him I'm quite sure He knows what He's talking about. The Shack, alternatively, creates a false view of Christ, one that isn't based on the Bible. Thus, it attempts to create a story that has a false view of Christ, so it fails.

2) Parables don't have to be true or completely lined up with the moral you want to present. The problem with The Shack is it's more of an analogy, it's built like a real story - it's not a parable (and even if it were, it still has a false message).

[Athanasius]

Let me pray about that, okay? Starting a thread for the express purpose of exposing or critiquing another Christian is not my style. Lewis made a great contribution to Christian literature, and I have very close friends whose interest in Christ was piqued by reading Mere Christianity. But the Narnia books were not, to put it charitably, Lewis at his best. I'll start the thread after I become a full-fledged, grown-up member, which will be Sunday, I think; I want to have access to PMs, because questions might emerge that I don't want to address publicly. (About Narnia, I hasten to add!) In fact, this reply would be a PM if such were available.

Now back to the subject of the thread.....

You're 'exposing' or 'critiquing' the work of another Christian, while that may in some way reflect back upon the author of that work I wouldn't necessarily say that by examining the work of the author you're explicitly examining the author as a person. In a way, discussing the teaching rather than the teacher.

I don't think any of us would mind if you mentioned your objections towards Narnia, I think you'd find the comments quite welcome... Assuming you still wished to bring them up after praying about them.

[Prufrock]

You're 'exposing' or 'critiquing' the work of another Christian, while that may in some way reflect back upon the author of that work I wouldn't necessarily say that by examining the work of the author you're explicitly examining the author as a person. In a way, discussing the teaching rather than the teacher.

I don't think any of us would mind if you mentioned your objections towards Narnia, I think you'd find the comments quite welcome... Assuming you still wished to bring them up after praying about them.

I appreciate your patience, and will be more than willing to share what little I've found. It can wait a few days.

Say! Has anyone read that book The Shack?

[Gulah Papyrus]

No - only the last one, as the man is named.

Is that a rule?

[Gulah Papyrus]

Two things:

1) They come from Jesus, so if they point back to Him I'm quite sure He knows what He's talking about. The Shack, alternatively, creates a false view of Christ, one that isn't based on the Bible. Thus, it attempts to create a story that has a false view of Christ, so it fails.

2) Parables don't have to be true or completely lined up with the moral you want to present. The problem with The Shack is it's more of an analogy, it's built like a real story - it's not a parable (and even if it were, it still has a false message).

Understood. But...so the statement you made about your friend wondering if The Shack was true, doesn't really have any bearing on the issue at hand...right? Or... does it?

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.

Does this statement 'fail'?

[apothanein kerdos]

Understood. But...so the statement you made about your friend wondering if The Shack was true, doesn't really have any bearing on the issue at hand...right? Or... does it?

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.

Does this statement 'fail'?

Not at all.

Comparing Lewis to Young is like comparing an apple to an NES - they're two completely different things.

Lewis wrote a parable that is obviously fiction, obviously a metaphor, and obviously pointing the reader to something much higher and much truer than the work itself. For anyone to think that this story is real or that it completely describes Christ as He really is that person would have to either be crazy or have a severe misunderstanding of the work.

Young, however, wrote a book that may or may not be fiction (at least in other people's minds), is saying it contains the truth within, attempts to describe God "as is," and so on. For anyone to take this book as real or that it completely describes Christ as He really is, that person would merely have to read the introduction.

Does that help clarify?

[markedward]

Semi-disrail:

No - only the last one, as the man is named.

How is that an actual reason that the parable of Lazarus and the rich man was an actual set of events?

Why is the guy named Lazarus?
"Because the story is real."

But... how do you know the story is real?
"Because the guy was given a name."

It's circular reasoning... one of those "logical fallacy" thingies. You can't use circular reasoning as the sole reason that the parable of Lazarus and the rich man was an actual set of events. And, further, you can't claim that the parable was an actual set of events because a person was named in it, because you're making a total assumption that people being named suddenly makes them real people, even if told in a medium that allows for fictional characters (note how the parable of Lazarus and the rich man immediately follows four other parables, all with the same overarching theme): Scripture never defines a rule of "Anytime a character in a story is given a name, it means that the entirety of the story is true." People just assume that one simple, but entirely baseless, "rule" when they read the parable... Now, I'm not saying the parable couldn't possibly have been an actual set of events... but a person can't claim it with such adamancy - as many do - based on these two flaws (the "he's named because he's real, he's real becaused he's named" circular logic, and the non-existent "stories containing names = real stories" rule).

Back to topic: I've found this thread greatly informational. I've tried to rep a few of you, but I apparently already have too recently.

Comparing Lewis to Young is like comparing an apple to an NES - they're two completely different things.

Hey. Only one of the authors mentioned wrote anything good. At least both an apple and an NES are good for something

[9Marksfan]

Is that a rule?

Actually isn't the rich young ruler a narrative? It's a simple fact that the rich man and lazarus is the only "parable" where the man is named - which gives a strong suggestion that it is in fact historical - many commentators believe that the crowds would have known both men. And the form of a parable is to have the language "there was a certain man" etc, a bit like our "once upon a time", which shows you that what is about to come is not historical, but fiction. So. yes, I suppose it is a "rule" - within their culture. But I would agree with AK - The Shack is not a parable.