The book entitled The Shack, by Wm. Paul Young, has quite a following. This book has been read by a broad spectrum of readers and rapidly climbed the best seller lists from its introduction to the market in 2007. It peaked on the USA Today Best Seller list at #2 and more than 10 million copies have been sold. How far is the reach of this book? To date, it has been translated into more than 30 languages!
Within Christian circles, there is a mixed review of the book, but it seems that on the whole it is widely accepted amongst the evangelical community. With resounding endorsements by people such as Eugene Peterson and Michael W. Smith, many quickly conclude that this book is a quality work that is worthy of their time and trust.
I stayed on the sideline for a long time, but after encountering so many who raved about the book and “what it has done for their faith”; I reluctantly picked-up a copy and read it this summer. Why was I so reluctant? Three main reasons: 1.) I had read excerpts from the book and had great concern about the way in which God was depicted; 2.) I’ve never been a reader of Christian fiction; and 3.) I already have plenty to read as it is!
Upon reading this book for myself, I must say that I am greatly disturbed by its contents and greatly concerned for those who sing its praises. Furthermore, I am astonished at the reception this book has had with professing Christians and the fervor in which they share it with others within the church and their communities.
The terms “disturbed” and “astonished” are strong words that I don’t casually throw around. But I use them freely as I warn against the contents of this book. Packaged in subtle ways, this book contains ideas and proclamations that are in total opposition to the Bible. What’s more, quite often the author attributes these anti-biblical proclamations to God himself when fictitiously quoting the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
I will endeavor to demonstrate my claims against this book and expose the thoughts and intentions of the author that contradict the Bible in a few posts over the next couple of weeks. I will not hit every problem I found in the book…just the flagrant ones. As I type this I’m struck with the realization that the less flagrant contradictions may be the more dangerous (what did I read that I missed!?!?). Nevertheless, there are some huge biblical contradictions that I cannot remain silent on and it is those that I will address.
The Shack vs. The Bible #1
Since I am arguing that this book consistently contradicts the Bible, it is best to start by pointing to the author’s view of Scripture. Early in the book the author narrates the thoughts of the ficticious Mack, the book’s main character, who has just received a letter from God…in his mailbox:
“…he had been taught that God had completely stopped any overt communication with moderns, preferring to have them only listen to and follow sacred Scripture, properly interpreted, of course. God’s voice had been reduced to paper, and even that paper had to be moderated and deciphered by the proper authorities and intellects. It seemed that direct communication with God was something exclusively for the ancients and uncivilized, while educated Westerners’ access to God was mediated and controlled by the intelligentsia. Nobody wanted God in a box, just in a book. Especially an expensive one bound in leather with gilt edges, or was that guilt edges?”
Cited from The Shack, pp. 65-66
At first glance, one might conclude that these are merely the thoughts of Mack who is struggling in life and confused and embittered. However, the concept of man reducing “God’s voice to paper, and even that paper had to be moderated and deciphered by the proper authorities and intellects” is never corrected in the book and, in fact, is substantiated in many statements attributed to God (as will be seen in the next post about the Trinitarian relationship of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). There are strong and sarcastic undertones in this quote. There is no evidence of an appreciation and cherishing of the God-inspired Scriptures. There is a strong sense that the author does not respect and value the proper interpretation of Scripture.
Here is what God claims about His Bible:
20 knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. 21 For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. [1 Peter 1:20-21]
16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable… [2 Timothy 3:16]
4 For whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that through endurance and through the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope. [Romans 15:4]
These verses do not portray the Bible as a “reduction” of God’s voice to paper! God inspired the writing of His Word and such God-breathed Scripture is profitable for our instruction and endurance and encouragement so that we might have hope! In a world full of change, we are blessed beyond measure to have the stable and immovable Word of God. We are most fortunate to have “God in a book!” This is nothing to scoff at.
On another note, we should read his statement about the “intelligentsia” with caution. After stating that God’s voice had been reduced to paper he writes, “and even that paper had to be moderated and deciphered by the proper authorities and intellects. It seemed that direct communication with God was something exclusively for the ancients and uncivilized, while educated Westerners’ access to God was mediated and controlled by the intelligentsia.”
Most often it is the people who don’t wish to conform to the authority of Scripture that make such statements. The Bible was given to all men in simple and common language. There is no human authority that can tell man what the Bible “really means.” That is a role reserved for the Holy Spirit. However, God did make provision for some to be pastors and teachers who are called to faithfully proclaim the Scriptures to the Church so that God’s people would conform to His character. This, however, is not “intelligentsia.” Rather, this is pastoral ministry with the heart of a shepherd.
As we read The Shack, we must have an accurate understanding of the author’s view of Scripture and we must be rightly warned that what will follow will be in the light of this view. Follow along with me and I think you will see this played out in subsequent excerpts.
