Fallen and Flawed

Thank you for your insights on The Shack. I have noticed many fellow christians reading this book and thinking that it’s a good thing. Fortunately, I was educated enough on this book through Hank Hanigraff, and I have avoided reading it. Your review has only confirmed this. Thanks for helping us connect a few dots.

Rock on, Nexus. Feel free to share. I look forward to reading your blog as well. Thanks for stopping by.

I hope you continue this site, Demian. You have worked hard at honing your skills and the fruits of your labor are bringing dividends to people. Pursue the true triune God with all the heart you’ve got!

Thank you Andrew! I appreciate the kind words and the encouragement. I look forward to never stopping.

Great review! I’ve read The Shack twice and couldn’t agree with you more. Read my review I’ve posted on Amazon and a few other sites.

While I haven’t read this book for myself, my confidence in your interpretation is high and coincides with various other interpretations I’ve heard. With the overwhelming evidence against it, I’m glad I didn’t waste my valuable time. Thanks, Demian!

Steve, thank you for the kind words. Your confidence in me means a lot. I’m glad I could help. Hope I can do it again.

I recently read the 248 page paper edition of The Shack. I can not believe you found all the things wrong with this book unless you read this book with a mindset against the book before you even read it. It is Christian fiction, not the Bible.

Hi Tom,

I appreciate your comment. And the visit.

I must admit…I went into reading the Shack with a negative slant. I’d met people who loved it. And I met people who didn’t. So I thought I’d see for myself.

But I did ask the Lord to please give me an open mind and to see what other people see in it. And as I read, I constantly asked “Am I being too critical?”

I gave it a fair trial. But I walked away shaking my head.

And you’re right–it’s fiction. Not the Bible. Yet, don’t you think that what it teaches should line up with the Bible?

And if it’s “Christian fiction,” shouldn’t it jive with biblical truths?

And if it doesn’t, can we still call it “Christian fiction?”

Let me know what you think. I look forward to hearing from you.

I also went into it with an open mind. I know people who just raved about the book. Said it was life-changing. I also read some of the Biblically based reviews that said it was unscriptural. Still I kept an open mind. I was shocked at how bad and offensive the book was. I could not believe that anyone claiming to be a follower of Christ could possibly find any redeeming value in this dangerous piece of garbage. Sorry to be so blunt but there’s no other way to explain it. My review is posted 5 comments above if you want to know my take on the book. If you loved The Shack you really need to find out how to become a follower of Christ and make that choice now. After you receive the Holy Spirit you will see the book through new eyes. If you truly are a follower of Christ then you need to read your Bible more… a lot more.

Well, you lost me with calling Peterson’s endorsement “uneducated”. You’re Fallen & Flawed–I love the blog title, BTW–but smarter than Eugene Peterson. That’s confidence, I’ll give you that.

The greatest thing about The Shack is it gives us permission to take God out of the box we’ve been keeping Him in. Instead, I think you’ve pounded a couple more nails into the lid.

Peace.

I truly believe that young with his writings of there being no need for a hierarchy reflects his beliefs in anarchy. What was he thinking when he wrote about how men wore not meant to be lead by anyone? I thought about how adam and eve had to obey God and follow everything he said and how all throughout the BIble God had appointed individuals to lead his people through struggles. Also what was he thinking when he wrote about a black woman being God who refers to man as Folk all throughout the story. Good beginning, bad and controversial plot, horrible ending.

Nuts!
Isn’t it amazing how we hate a graceful God?? Mack raised his voice and use foul language with God??? What is foul language? According to whom? Paul use the word “shit” in the bible but we watered that down. Jacob wrestled with God for hours! David “spat in God’s face” when he slept with Bathsheba and had her hubbie killed. The disciples abandoned Jesus in his “hour of need.”
OH, and GOD forbid that “he” is portrayed as a woman! God is a white man with a long beard and he’s REALLY mad at us!

Give me a break. This book is not a bible commentary and it does stretch our limited understanding of the trinity, but if you mean to imply that you understand it to the point that you can say unequivocally that God was NOT on the cross with Jesus, then you are unique in the history of humankind. Wasn’t/Isn’t Jesus GOD? Hasn’t Jesus, the Father and the Spirit been ONE since the beginning of their nonbeginning? Haven’t you heard the Shema? “Hear o Israel, the Lord God, our God is ONE?”
Lighten up dude. God ain’t a legalist! and Thank God for that.

I have to reply to this. I find the many judgments on the character of William P. Young here to be fairly unbiblical and, well, judgmental really.

I also am among those who went into THE SHACK with a fairly negative bias or slant. However, this was cleared quickly when I was reminded (by the book) how God and I had a relationship when I was 7 years old and living in and out of foster homes where awful tragedy was commonplace.

Had God revealed Himself to me as my Father, I would have flat out rejected him at that time in my life. Flat out. I hated the idea of a father. All fathers had done at that point in my life is fail me.

God revealed Himself to me as my nurturing mother at that point in my life because that is what I needed. I do keep referring to God is Him because I now have a relationship with my Father in heaven. I love my Lord. And I really adore that my Lord is to me what I need at any given time.

I did not have a sense that William suggested that the Trinity was 1 person working in 3 different modes. It appears that you drew that out of it because you appear to have expected it. I’ve read it since reading this review and I still don’t see it.

Downplays the presence of God? Have you ever cursed at God? No? I have. In fact, I’d wager a guess that most Christians have been so angry with God that they’ve yelled or cursed at Him. The great thing about God is, He can handle it.

In general, I think you have pulled a lot of untruths out of this book. It is having a healing affect on the lives of many Christians. Some books are not for all people. For example, PURPOSE DRIVEN LIFE did nothing for me. However, God used it for great things in churches and lives. God is doing the same with THE SHACK. Just may not be for you.

Curtis, you said, “Have you ever cursed at God?” Yes…but never in his presence. Open your Bible and point to any situation in which a person confronted by God was still standing…
–
And I think you forget that the only reason we could EVER stand before the presence of God is because of Christ’s death. Not sure how cursing at him reflects an attitude of honor or glory.
–
Furthermore, I suspect you hold to a view that we can thwart God’s advance, so he has to camouflage himself and woo us…I can’t reconcile that thinking with a sovereign, providential, all-wise, all-powerful God.
–
I will confess, however, that I’m not nearly as adamant about the book and it’s seemingly flaws. It really is harmless, exposes the beauty of a relationship of God, as you suggested, and is just a piece of fiction…my beef now is with Christians who love it more than their own Bibles.
–
Thank you and I appreciate being open and honest. I value your comments.

Demian,
I really appreciate your response to Curtis. We all need to keep in mind that Jesus taught primarily in parables…depicting the Father as a woman looking for a coin, a shepherd looking for a sheep etc. They were grass roots stories aimed at passing along deep truths…truths that were often missed by the hearers.
You are also right on that believers need to have even more enthusiasm for the Bible than for this (or any other) work of fiction (or not fiction for that matter.
I’ve read the Shack twice, undestand its shortcomings but really appreciate it for what it is. However, if Oprah comes out in favor of it I just may have to burn it! LOL.

Demian,
[I, too, am Fallen & Flawed and not deserving of the Holy Grace of God.] I have read & reread The Shack and find your comments curious and disturbing. I have to start with your comment suggesting that if I think it is a good book, I am not using my brain. An ad hominen such as that usually causes me to stop reading critical reviews. However, since I know you to be a writer who does use his brain when preparing comments, I persisted. Next, it is well to remember that Mr. Young’s book is a piece of fiction, written with a purpose that derives from his experiences, imagination, and talent. Since the book is considered “Christian Fiction,” I do agree with you that the author does have some responsibility to his readership. However, as fiction it seems to me that the author also clearly reserves the right to use whatever creative devices are necessary to achieve his purpose. Finally, it is bothersome that you were so unhappy with the book that you refused to read through to the end. As an author who was, no doubt, going to critique the book, I believe you owed it to Mr. Young to read his entire work.

Since I like to think that I was using my brain while I was reading the book, I would like to add these thoughts to this discussion.
1. God will do what God will do to achieve God’s purpose. How do I know that God would not appear to Mack exactly as he appeared? Are you offended that He appeared as a “large black women,” or does that presentation just not make sense to you? It didn’t make sense to Mack, until it did. For whatever reason, God knew that this was what Mack needed. Has that ever happened to you? That you see God’s presence in a way, a person, a thing, that you never expected does not even make sense at the time? God will do for you what you need, at the moment of your need, in God’s way.
2. It is difficult to see the Trinity, as we understand it; but it is certainly there. God/Papa is certainly the primary entity and Jesus is His Son. Jesus refers to God as ABBA, and identifies Himself and the Holy Spirit as separate and subordinate. However, it is Young’s narative that describes how this relationship is to work in us. Yes, they are three; but one does not do what the other wants. They ARE IN each other. When Mack asks Jesus what He thinks of “WWJD,” Jesus replies that it is a nice, but wrong sentiment. Jesus tells Mack that He does not want him to do as Jesus would do, He wants him TO BE Jesus, and it is the Holy Spirit that empowers you to do that. This way, you don’t ask WWJD, you just DO, and because of the indwelling Spirit, your behavior is Christ-like. I believe that is the basis of the Paradigm-Perception-Emotion discussion (but you might not have gotten that far in the book).
3. Obvioulsy, love & grief and love & anger and love & forgiveness are at the heart of this book; and Mack’s spiritual encounter is intended to be enlightening, comforting, and healing.
4.Through Young’s literary devices, it is made clear to us that Mack has to go through this encounter, in this way, to begin to heal.
At the heart of this is the knowledge that only through giving up the false belief that he is in a position to judge, can he unburden himself of anger. This begins with forgiveness toward God through the realization that he is in no position to judge God.. His forgiveness of his own father adds to the foundation. His ability to forgive the murderer, without letting him off the hook, allows him to fully grieve. Eventually, he can forgive himself (and, thereby, love himself and feel worthy of God’s love). When he learns of his other daughter’s fear that she was respponsible for Missy’s murder, he is able to comfort her and help her understand that that is simply not true. …and so on

I am not a biblical scholar, so these thoughts are just my feelings about the book and how it fits into my paradigm. As a psychotherapist and a Christian, I believe the book has much to say about the importance in our life of a relationship with God, through Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Having, and understanding God’s purpose for that relationship is lifesaving; especially in times of deep crisis. Without it we are alone, even when we are in a crowd of people who care. Forgiveness is the glue of every important relationship in our lives. To have God in us, is to know forgiveness and to be empowered forgive.

With one exception, these thoughts were not intended to change anybody’s mind. They were just to add to the discussion. The only mind I would like to change is of the people who so closed in their thinking that they are willing to accept your thoughts as their own, and, therefore declare the book unreadable.

ndh

Neil, my attitude towards the Shack has softened since I wrote this…so I have to say I’m a little embarrassed I poisoned the well on the get go.
–
At this point, my fundamental beef with the book [and it's hardly Young's fault] is that Christian’s love it more than their Bible.
–
Of course, I defined what I meant by a “good book” and I’ll freely admit it amounts to “I’m a snob.” No apologies there…but I also don’t want to come across as a jerk, but although Young is an entertaining writer, I simply couldn’t stomach his style. Or the hokiness of the story. There, I said it!
–
But you point out some substantial gifts the book does provide–like God helping us overcome tragedy. I should’ve done a better job of communicating that.
–
In the end, I confess I was caught up in a knee-jerk reaction and responded on the fly…as of late settling in and thinking about my original thoughts on the book [what does that say about me?].
–
At this point, it’s not a battle I need to wage. Now, I just want people to read the Bible. In one sitting. At least the NT.
–
Thanks for your thoughts, Neil. Take care.

Demian,
Again, I appreciate your willingness to re-evaluate your self and being open to sharing your thoughts with us. While there are things expressed in the book that I would probably write differently (as would many others folks), it was a great read on a few different levels, some of which I have communicated earlier. YOu know, I have to constantly remind myself that when I get to stand in the presence of the Lord and have all of the stuff that I now see “through a glass, darkly” made clear, I’m going to realize just how “hosed up” I was about the stuff I believed about God and His kingdom. This humbles me. I’m probably going to think “what is she/he doing here!!!??” and have Peter (???) say, “Don’t worry, he/she is in the Exalted Level and you are in the “Smells Like Smoke” level…you won’t see much of each other.”
By the way, did you ever finish the book? The last couple of chapters are really, really good.

Shalom
Mike

Mike, I won’t finish the book for one good reason: It’s bad fiction. Before you shut me, out let me explain.
–
In the world of fiction, if I wrote a book about a Russian peseant and got the facts about his clothes, culture and character wrong, genuine Russians would call me on it and I’d be lucky if I got published let alone any readers.
–
I mean, it’s not like the Bible describes God in vague terms. We can be pretty precise about who he is. I’ll give Young some wiggle room for writing fiction, but I’m going to hold his feet to the fire when it comes to credibility. So he lost me when he veered off into left field.
–
For example, I just don’t see any biblical precedent that God condescends to any man except through the person of Jesus Christ…and when men did show up in God’s presence we know what happened: In fact, from Moses to Isaiah to Peter to John in Revelation, men in the presence of God fall flat on their face in adoration. Somehow Macks an anomaly? Some how God has to put on kid gloves for a rebellious, angry man in the 20th Century? Not saying he can’t. Just questioning why we should believe it.
–
You’re right, we know just a smidgen of who God is, but it’s not like we’re blind or in the dark. We can make good educated guesses based on biblical revelation and creation. Yet we’re so afraid of “putting God in a box”. That’s not very productive. Cause all were saying is you have a license to imagine God anyway you want. I’d hate to put God in a box, so it’s okay to say he’s an octopus who rides a tricycle?
–
Bottom line, if Young is saying he’s writing this book on the Christian God of the Bible and history, then he failed. But Young wasn’t trying to do that.
–
At one point he admitted he freely wrote this book to tell his children his thoughts about God. In other words, he created God in his own image. An image that’s nothing more than wild speculations of a rogue Christian.
–
That’s why I won’t finish the book. [I will promise you to have somebody tell me the ending...I know lots of people who've read it.] Take care, Mike.

Demian,

Sorry it took me so long to reply. I’m a Christian missionary, currently touring Australia. Not much time for debate there.

I want to start by saying that I appreciate that you use your brain and aren’t just another guy ranting an opinion. I like you would like people to be more enthusiastic about the Bible. Hopefully THE SHACK could do or help with that a bit.

In response to your responses to me. Yes, you have cursed God, but not in the presence. I do believe that the Bible calls our Lord an Omnipresent God. That would mean that I am always in the full presence of God and if I curse Him, I am doing it in his full presence.

God NEVER disguised Himself to me by being my nurturing mother. NEVER. I want to just set that record straight. I didn’t need a Father, heavenly or otherwise, in my childhood. So what did God do? He revealed His nurturing side to me. The hen that gathers her chicks under her wings if you will. Because of this I have come to know the Heavenly Father that I adore with all my heart.

Thanks for your time and consideration friend.

God Bless,

Curtis

Curtis: Hey, thank you for thoughtful reply. No apologies necessary about the timing. In discussing the Shack in such thoughtful ways my thinking on the book has evolved, so I appreciate your time. Just so you know I don’t think this is an issue to die for…debate, yes, but that even has it’s limits. Thanks for keeping me updated on your work…I’ll keep in mind to pray for you. And hope to hear from you again, friend.

I am extremely disapointed in this review of an outstanding book. This book is not attempting to be Scripture. The reviewer may have failed to notice that the book is a novel. However, it does a wonderful job describing how God connects with us to heal our deepest pain. This review throws cold water on a lot of good stuff just because of being narrowminded. It was similar narrowmindedness that rejected Jesus himself.

Thanks Jay.

Read the book all the way through in a couple hours. I couldn’t put it down. I was mesmerized by the story. Looked up all I could on shack website then watched http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=6198 for best critique I could find. What impressed me was their ability to admit the good, not just the bad and controversial.

I admit that Young bothers me and the more I found out about his anti-local church approach the more I saw a man that was deadly wounded writing out of a wounded heart. To his credit it never was something that he wanted to share with the world just with his family. It was an intimate struggle on paper. Flawed and fallen as it was it was able to touch cords in people. It was able to resonate with the burning heart of people to live a life enjoying God and not being under condemnation. It touched the desire of people to embrace one that has suffered in all points, knows our frame, and sympathesizes with our weakness. It touches a cord with all those that long to experience the reality that God would humble himself and demonstrate his love in a way that ministers to the human heart in a uniqueness that we have not known.

I agree that people ought to read their Bible’s more. It bothers me that we are caught up in the fiction story more than the non-fiction reality.

Brad

Brad: All the good things you pointed out about Young’s book…well said, and well written. I confess I didn’t do a good job of pointing those out and I couldn’t have done a better job.

Demian,
You are such a blessing. May God continue to give you boldness to be so strong in your stand for truth and so soft hearted to still hear the small voices of God in the voices of your critics.

I have to admit I loved little glimpses, that Young gave, of my Father God’s playfulness. It’s so easy to get stuck in self-righteous, overly pious ruts where we lose the greatest gift God gave us to live as Christ in the earth: His joy. A sense of humor is something that makes no sense to Phariseeism as I have lived it well.

I enjoyed seeing the pleasure in a story of how much delight the Father got being served by the Son and how much the Son enjoyed serving the Father. I almost cried. It was a glimpse of God’s joy in His son, in whom He is well pleased. In whom is His total delight. Man, it is awesome to serve God when you see His smile over your life!

I just read the book. I was disturbed by the theology and the writing style. I feel that a person that was actually in the presence of God would be completely awestruck and overwhelmed with love and joy. I doubt they would be immune and treat God as Young has treated God.
My few interactions with the Holy Spirit left me wanting to worship God and to know God. I was not left to want to argue with HIM or treat Him as if He was just a normal person. This makes me very suspicious the writer has ever known God.
I have issues with the way Young stated this was a true story with all the confusing claims that is was a true story in the introduction stating Mack is a real person. It is fiction. Also the wreck-coma-morphine conclusion to wrap up this story is just too contrived. I don’t think something called the Missy Project is worthy of any author. It smacks of capitalism. It seems very self serving.

The book is arrogant and presumes to foist some non scriptural outlook of who and what God is on the reader. I find it to be Young’s view and he is entitled to his view but to have his view coming out of the mouth of God to be presumptions, arrogant and I find I just have no words to describe this blasphemy.
This book is just a big huge mess and unsound. It drags and it is very unconvincing.

I just read the book. I was disturbed by the theology and the writing style. I feel that a person that was actually in the presence of God would be completely awestruck and overwhelmed with love and joy. I doubt they would be immune and treat God as Young has treated God.

Jd SNOW wrote: “I just read the book. I was disturbed by the theology and the writing style. I feel that a person that was actually in the presence of God would be completely awestruck and overwhelmed with love and joy. I doubt they would be immune and treat God as Young has treated God.”

Also you mentioned YOUR encounters with the HS. Well they were YOUR experiences…not anyone elses. It seems a bit arrogant to lift your experienced up as a higher encounter than the character in this fictional book.

Well Jd, athough your thoughts regarding his style and theology are certainly opinions shared by some others, they are just that, opinions. But I think you are correct in commenting that “a person that was actually in the presence of God would be completely awestruck and overwhelmed” but I don’t know that they would be so with “love and joy.” The biblical model would be for them to be awestruck and overwhelmed WITH FEAR.
And I think that is why the author chose to personify (personification is something that Jesus did ALL THE TIME in his parables…God as a woman looking for a pearl of great value…God as a prodigal’s father…God as a farmer.etc.) God as a gentle black woman, Jesus as a “blue collar guy” and The Spirit as a wispy, cloudy entity (like the cloud in the desert). Mack didn’t fall down in fear because God didn’t want him to fear Him.

I’m sorry. You diatribe sounds bitter and you really don’t get your point across in a meaningful way. It just sounds like you are trying to defend God’s honor or something. He doesn’t need that…He never has needed that because it doesn’t need defending.

Please soften your heart and see this book for what it is: A FICTIONAL parable about one man’s encounter with the Holy Trinity. It is a book full of love and grace. If you think it is trite or silly, think about this: God became a man and subjected himself to torture and murder so that he could save sinners who were “by nature objects of wrath” and His enemies. God’s story is a LOVE story, not a legal treatise. And it is REALLY Foolish to the lost.

Via con Dios…in Him.

I have been with God and my experience was such that I was so at peace and joyful. I wanted to be with God and all my fears and worries were removed being with Him. I don’t think God is about fear. Fear is something He understands but something that is not in my relationship with God. I felt so uneasy reading this fiction. Many things rang so false but I can only use my own experience against this story.

You can’t begin Mike to know me or my relationship and or judge me. Humans are complex. What is it about my opinion about a fictional book that causes you to have such a reaction to me and my opinion and thus label me bitter and hard hearted? This is puzzling. I just did not enjoy reading this book and would not recommend it to a person in search of the truth.