| 
 enlarge | Author: William P. Young
Publisher: Windblown Media
Category: Book
List Price: $14.99
Buy New: $7.10
You Save: $7.89 (53%)
New (86) Used (48) Collectible (1) from $7.09
Rating:  1878 reviews
Sales Rank: 8
Media: Paperback
Edition: 1st
Pages: 256
Number Of Items: 1
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.4
Dimensions (in): 7.8 x 5.2 x 0.8
ISBN: 0964729237
Dewey Decimal Number: 813.6
EAN: 9780964729230
ASIN: 0964729237
Publication Date: July 1, 2008
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Shipping: Expedited shipping available
Condition: Special Purchase Limited Time Brand New (we do not ship to ak, hi, ks, ky, ny, wa, nd)
|
| Customer Reviews:
 Heretical theology in the guise of fiction November 21, 2008
C. Matthew Privett (Louisville, KY)
4 out of 8 found this review helpful
Make no mistake about it. This is a book about theology in the guise of fiction, and it is dangerous at that. How any Christian bookstore can justify placing this on its shelves is beyond me. I have read many reviews about how people have had their view of God challenged, transformed, or, to take a word from the After Words of the book, revolutionized. Unfortunately, though, this book goes to great depths to undermine the very revelation of God Himself to the world. br / br / ...the Bible somehow left his hand... (115) br / br /Christians believe that the sixty-six books constituting the Old and New Testaments are the sole authoritative and infallible source of God revealing Himself to us. The Bible itself exhorts the disciple of Jesus Christ to study to show himself approved. It is the "word" that is the lamp unto our feet and the light unto our paths. br / br /The Shack, however, places communication with God on a face-to-face level that has not existed since man fell into sin in the Garden of Eden. While we as human beings might long for something tangible that we can see and hear and touch, the Bible teaches that faith is the evidence of things not seen, the assurance of things hoped for. The author associates searching the Scriptures with Sunday prayers and hymns that "weren't cutting it anymore... Cloistered spirituality... little religious social clubs" which left the main character, Mack, wanting more (66). These are not so veiled shots at not only the sufficiency of Scripture, but against the church. Young uses pejorative and prejudicial language that takes the worst presuppositions about the church and assumes them as universally true for all who might hold to a high view of the Bible. br / br /Overall, the Bible is viewed in a negative light, as is serious study of the Bible and theology in general. Mack's seminary education is never referred to in a positive fashion. br / br /Jesus' work on the cross in constantly cited, although I'm not sure Young ever refers to Him as "Christ" or "Messiah." Yet, His work on the cross, while extolled in the narrative, is downplayed by Mack's longing for more. "I guess part of me would like to believe that God would care enough about me to send a note," says Mack (71). Yet, Bible-believing Christians would point to a simple verse like John 3:16, or better yet, 1 John 4:9-10, to show that God's care for those He loves is summed up in the fact that "God has sent His only begotten Son into the world so that we might live through Him. In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins." This craving for more than what is revealed in Scripture is not uncommon among many who sit in pews every Sunday, but it undermines the fact that God HAS manifested His love in Jesus Christ. br / br /One of, if not THE, most sickening part of this book is its absolutely heretic display of the Trinity, which is historically understood as God manifesting Himself in three Persons - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit - equally, eternally, and simultaneously. Young intentionally uses multicultural and multiethnic persons to represent the Father (a large black woman named Elousia, but called "Papa"), the Son (Jesus, a Middle Eastern Jewish carpenter), and Sarayu (an Asian woman who is erratic in her appearance), a not so subtle shot at many white people's view of God. Yet, the Bible is clear that God is not to be described in terms of an image, but that God is spirit (John 4:24). br / br /Scripture is also clear that while all three Persons in the Trinity are equally one being and work in harmony with one another, they do function in distinct roles. The Father has the function of headship within the Trinity. The Son functions in submission to the will of the Father, serving as an example, by the way, that we should follow in His steps (1 Pet 2:21). And how do we know the will of the Father? The Scriptures. br / br /The Shack, however, absolutely denies biblical truth about the Trinity. Relationships predicated upon submission, as that biblically displayed by God the Father and God the Son, are viewed negatively. Instead, it's all about love and relationship. The masculine image of God is called into question. God's revelation of "itself" in masculine personages is explained away by the world needing a father more than a mother. The hypostatic union of Jesus Christ as fully God and fully man is affirmed in word in the book, but the more His work on the cross and His ministry are explained His deity is diminished for the sake of Him appearing "more human" than Papa or Sarayu. br / br /The persons of the Trinity, in the view of the author, enjoys an altogether creepy relationship with one another. At one point Papa and Jesus will enjoy a moment that will leave the reader wondering if their are quasi-sexual overtones being implied by Young. Meanwhile, the enjoyment of Father, Son, and Spirit is put in fully anthropomorphic terms - laughing at kitchen accidents, enjoying meals, etc. Worldly chaos, and not the order of creation, is seen as that which brings God pleasure. br / br /But if that were not enough, The Shack promotes an absolutely unbiblical view of salvation in which Christ's work on the cross is looked at "fondly," but the reason for His sacrificial death is never explained in any semblance of fashion representing that which the Bible explains. The idea that God poured out His wrath for the sins of those He was saving on His only begotten Son on the cross is outright refuted. "I am not who you think I am, Mackenzie," says Papa. "I don't need to punish people for sin. Sin is its own punishment, devouring you from the inside. It is not my purpose to punish sin; it's my joy to cure it" (119-20). So Jesus' work was not about God displaying His love for people by punishing Jesus for their sins, according to Young. This is a denial of penal substitution, a denial of how the Bible describes the cross. br / br /But wait, there's more. Not only did Jesus not die for the punishment of sins, but it is not even necessary to believe the gospel in order to be saved. br / br / Those who love me come from every system that exists. They were Buddhists or Mormons, Baptists or Muslims, Democrats, Republicans, and many who don't vote or are not part of any Sunday morning or religious institutions. . . . I have no desire to make them Christian, but I do want to join them in their transformation into sons and daughters of my Papa, into my brothers and sisters, into my Beloved. (182) br / br /Those are the words of Jesus, by the way, to which Mack responds, "Does that mean that all roads will lead to you?" br / br / Not at all. Most roads don't lead anywhere. What it does mean is that I will travel any road fo find you. (182) br / br /This passage in a crucial section of the book does not teach universalism, the view that God saves each and every person who ever lived. However, it does teach an equally false gospel of inclusivism, the view that God will save, through Christ, "true seekers" in all religions. So not only did Jesus not die to absorb the wrath of God against sin, as a propitiation (Rom 3:21-26; 1 John 4:9-10), but now you don't even have to believe the gospel to be saved. br / br /The Shack amounts to an extremely dangerous textbook of theological psychobabble, a therapy session if you will, for anyone who suffers (meaning everybody). It denies Bible teachings left and right. I've only scratched the surface, not even really commenting on what it says about gender distinction in marriage relationships, the parent-child relationship, the idea of Christ being on a spiritual journey, and especially what it says about the church. br / br /I find it shocking and sad that many Christian bookstores, including Lifeway Christian Stores (more on that in an upcoming post), have this book on their shelves. That gives the book an endorsement in a sense that the undiscerning reader has and will fallen prey to. One need only to look at how popular this book is, a New York Times #1 Bestseller, to see that I am right. Eugene Peterson, who has written a popular paraphrase of the Bible (which I do not endorse), has said that, "This book has the potential to do for our generation what John Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress did for his. It's that good!" Contemporary Christian recording artist Michael W. Smith says the book "will leave you craving for the presence of God." As if the church doesn't have enough self-inflicted trouble communicating truth, now it shoots itself in the foot by not calling this book what it is: heresy. br / br /So I implore you, readers, to hack The Shack for the good of your soul, for the church, for the gospel of Jesus Christ, and for the glory of God.
 This felt so comfortable November 21, 2008
0 out of 2 found this review helpful
this is a very special work of art i believe God placed the words of this book in the authors heart . John C
Unbelievable. November 21, 2008
Micajah Autry
1 out of 4 found this review helpful
You will pick up this book in the store and wonder whether it might be a murder mystery, supernatural thriller, or other faithful genre of popular literature. br / br /You will flip through it to sample dialog, perhaps an ordinary paragraph. You might do this when you pick up a book to get a taste, sort of sneak up on the author in some corner of the book he might not have spent as much time crafting as he did the first or last pages. br / br /Then you will be shocked. You will see that Jesus, that is, Jesus Christ, is a fictional character in a piece of pulp fiction. It might be blasphemous; it is probably profane; it is certainly a dubious literary idea. Whatever else it is, it is a very tasteless way to kick American prose around while it's down. br / br /It is also incredible, unbelievable. Also, preposterous, hilarious, and bathetic.
An Open Invitation To Walk With God November 21, 2008
Ronald J. Aubry (Millersburg, OH United States)
0 out of 3 found this review helpful
I have loved the works of C. S. Lewis for most of my life. I consider his THE GREAT DIVORCE and THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA to be among the most important books ever written. But until I read THE SHACK, I would have had a hard time explaining "why" I feel so strongly about Lewis. W. P. Young's brilliant novel answers that question for me: its all about relationship with God. br / br /Lewis strips away the "churchy-ness," the "religiosity," the "stained-glass pietism" and leaves a pristine encounter with God. Is God present in the Church? in the Gospels? of course, but he is often hard to see there, through the ages of accumulated baggage which humanity has hung on faith. KNOWING God, not just knowing about him, but coming into and growing in relationship with God is what faith is all about. That is what Jesus came to give us -- and that is what W. P. Young presents for a new, world-weary generation of seekers. Although he never once quotes the Scriptures, every page of Young's book is alive with the Word of God and sings their praise. br / br /I find it marvelous that Mr. Young presents with such simplicity and ease that God is relationship of persons, seeking to draw us into relationship with himself. That is all God wants -- and that is all that the human heart could ever hope for or endure! If religion brings you to God, that is a marvelous thing. If Scripture brings you to God, that is certainly as he would have wished. But the point of faith -- and the point of living! -- is to somehow sometime finally come to that depth of relationship with God that God has in himself. Christians believe that we enter into that triune relationship through Christ, and I certainly agree with that: but the heart of all religion is that God invites us, God prods us, God entices us -- in short, God will do anything / everything necessary or possible (short of forcing us) to love him. And then the choice of love belongs to us. All this is conveyed magnificently in THE SHACK. br / br /After many years in ministry, I find nothing here offensive or theologically questionable. Call it a parable, call it a vision, call it a dream -- call it an invitation to walk more deeply with the God who walks with you. I am deeply moved by this book and grateful that God moved its author to write it.The Great DivorceThe Chronicles of Narnia Movie Tie-in Box Set Prince Caspian (rack) (Narnia)
 Enlightening at times; misleading at other times November 20, 2008
Anette Acker
1 out of 3 found this review helpful
As an aspiring novelist, I will only say one thing about Mr. Young's writing: Any author who can capture the hearts of this many readers deserves my full respect. He's obviously doing something right. br / br /But this book is not intended to be a literary masterpiece. It's really about the theology. And don't be fooled into thinking that Mr. Young dispenses with theology. The Shack represents his own interpretation of the Scriptures--his theology. Much of his theology is biblical, refreshing, and thought-provoking. But some of it is at the very least misleading, if not downright false. br / br /And why does theological precision matter? 2 Peter 1:19-21 says: "So we have the prophetic word made more sure, to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts. But know this first of all, that no Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." br / br /The Word of God is like a lamp--our only lamp--in a dark world. Some day the fog of this world will lift and all will see the truth. Now we walk in faith, with only the Word of God to light our path. Close your eyes for a moment and picture yourself alone before the judgment seat of God, having watered down the Word of God. When Jesus addressed false doctrine in the church of Pergamum, He said, "Therefore repent, or else I am coming to you quickly, and I will make war against them with the sword of My mouth." Rev. 2:16. The Shack refers to the Bible as a box that we put God into. God refers to it as His inspired Word that is able to save our souls if we receive it with humility. James 1:21. br / br /First, I want to applaud Mr. Young for tackling the problem of evil in a moving and thought-provoking way. His phrase "The Great Sadness" really resonated with me, and obviously with many other readers. I have known my own Great Sadness, so I know that when we are caught in the throes of evil no amount of philosophizing will take away the pain. He is right to say that God doesn't will evil, even though He can use evil for our good. The Bible says that Jesus went around doing good and healing people. He did this by the power of the Holy Spirit, and He calls us, his followers, to do the same. But the paradox of free will versus divine sovereignty is so complex that nobody has been able to explain it to everyone's satisfaction. Suffice it to say that the Bible is full of paradoxes because God's ways are so much higher than ours, and only by the Holy Spirit can we begin to reconcile them. To use an example: When you watch a 3-D movie, you need the glasses; otherwise you'll just get a headache. The Holy Spirit is like the glasses--you'll get a headache if you try to understand the Bible without Him. br / br /But there were problems with the Shack, in addition to Mr. Young's purported dismissal of theology. It flirts with Universalism and it discourages people from going to church. Universalism means that all people will be saved. Mr. Young doesn't actually say that, but he implies it and fudges the issue enough to let people interpret his words however they please. Now, he is right in saying that God has in Christ reconciled the world to Himself. 2 Cor. 5:18. God has removed the barrier between Himself and us--namely sin. Anyone can accept His offer of fellowship and salvation. However, we need to respond by accepting the offer of reconciliation. 2 Cor. 5:20. This means turning away from sin, or repenting, and allowing God to set our feet on the narrow path that leads to life. If we decide not to accept the offer of reconciliation, we will spend eternity apart from God. Although God will pursue us in love, He will never strip us of our freedom to choose. br / br /Mr. Young's criticism of the church is in many ways justified. However, let's not forget that we (Christians) are the church. Most of the time it's not the organizational structure that is the problem--it's sin and lukewarmness among the people. I don't have to go to church to find hypocrisy, complacency, and self-righteousness. All I have to do is look in the mirror. We need to function as the Body of Christ, which means we have to meet regularly with other believers. Instead of rejecting the church, let's pray that God will bring her back to life. br / br /Finally, if you are reading the Shack for the theology, I would recommend two other books for perspective: The Cost of Discipleship by Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Crazy Love by Francis Chan. br / br /Anette Acker
|
|
|
