T

What if today didn’t happen? There would be no victory over sin. There would be no freedom from the bondage of death. There would be no hope in Christ’s return.  Instead, there would be an unfathomable fear and dread.

But he rose from the dead just as he promised and is the Savior of his elect! Here’s the truth about this great day:

1 Now after the Sabbath, toward the dawn of the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the tomb. 2 And behold, there was a great earthquake, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled back the stone and sat on it. 3 His appearance was like lightning, and his clothing white as snow. 4 And for fear of him the guards trembled and became like dead men. 5 But the angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. 6 He is not here, for he has risen, as he said. Come, see the place where he lay. 7 Then go quickly and tell his disciples that he has risen from the dead, and behold, he is going before you to Galilee; there you will see him. See, I have told you.” 8 So they departed quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy, and ran to tell his disciples. 9 And behold, Jesus met them and said, “Greetings!” And they came up and took hold of his feet and worshiped him. 10 Then Jesus said to them, “Do not be afraid; go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee, and there they will see me.” [Matthew 28:1-10]

My favorite verse is 2 Corinthians 1:19-20:

19 For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, whom we proclaimed among you…was not Yes and No, but in him it is always Yes. 20 For all the promises of God find their Yes in him. That is why it is through him that we utter our Amen to God for his glory.

All of God’s promises were made “Yes” on this day! Everything about our faith is founded upon this day and the Lord’s resurrection. Without the resurrection, all of God’s promises would have been “No!” Without the resurrection, we would be a people with serious problems:

16 For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19 If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied.  [1 Cor 15:16-19]

But he said, “Yes!” He said, “Jesus Christ!” And it is through him that we say our “yes” to God for his glory.

Jesus rose from the dead! Which makes for the greatest day in history!

Think about the day between Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection. It had to have been a grueling day for his followers. The previous afternoon they had witnessed the horrible events of his death on the cross. Their last moment with Christ was his brutal death on a God-forsaken hill! The last words they heard their Lord say was, “It is finished.” [John 19:30] Was that it? They believed he was the Christ of God, [Luke 9:20] but what happened?

What was that day like for the disciples? We know they were in hiding with the doors locked. [John 20:19] What were their prayers like? Did they pray? Did they feel foolish for believing up to that point in Jesus? Did they argue with one another? I imagine they were mostly speechless. It’s hard to speak when you’re grieving.  It’s even harder to speak when you are grieving with no hope.

That day was the Sabbath. Normally a day of rest…but not this time. This time it was a day of shock, fear, trembling…and disbelief. Scripture specifically tells us the disciples had a belief problem.  When the disciples were told that Jesus had risen, they responded with unbelief:

11 But when they heard that he was alive and had been seen by her, they would not believe it. [Mark 16:11]

11 but these words seemed to them an idle tale, and they did not believe them. [Luke 24:11]

8 Then the other disciple, who had reached the tomb first, also went in, and he saw and believed; 9 for as yet they did not understand the Scripture, that he must rise from the dead. [John 20:8-9]

The disciples must have been devastated because of their unbelief! Why didn’t they understand the Scripture? Jesus spoke specifically about his death and resurrection…three times!  Mark was inspired to record:

31 And he began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes and be killed, and after three days rise again. 32 And he said this plainly. [Mark 8:31-32]

31 for he was teaching his disciples, saying to them, “The Son of Man is going to be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill him.  And when he is killed, after three days he will rise. 32 But they did not understand the saying, and were afraid to ask hiim. [Mark 9:31-32]

32 And taking the twelve again, he began to tell them what was to happen to him, 33 saying, “See, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be delivered over to the chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death and deliver him over to the Gentiles. 34 And they will mock him and spit on him, and flog him and kill him.  And after three days he will rise.” [Mark 10:32-34]

Why didn’t they believe? Why weren’t they excited about the incredible day that tomorrow would be? Why weren’t they worshiping and preparing for the fulfillment of the promises?

THE SILENCE WAS DEAFENING!

God chose to be silent for the duration of that day. There was no Jesus (yet), no Holy Spirit (yet), no angels, no burning bushes, no communication at all. Silence.

The silence of God tests a man’s faith like nothing else. I can identify with the disciples so clearly. I, too, struggle with unbelief when God is silent. My faith (like the disciple’s faith) is too often influenced by my momentary circumstances. I allow my circumstances to block my vision of the promises of God that he revealed to me in the Scriptures.

E

The concept of “New Year’s Resolutions” is as American as turkey at Thanksgiving. It’s what we do. Today, we even have websites that provide us with a place to publish our resolutions and invite those we choose to view them and hold us accountable to keeping them. Yet, there is so much failure.

George Will provides a great secular commentary on this failure in his column in the Washington Post: Given Up Your New Year’s Resolutions? It’s the American Way. There are several points in his column that merit our consideration. But the last paragraph is most worthy of our attention:

Willpower…is like a muscle that can be strengthened but is susceptible to exhaustion. Did you tell lots of people—did you blog about—your New Year’s resolutions? Akst knows why you didn’t: “self-control fatigue,” which is as American as microwave apple pie.

The root of the problem is that we place our New Year’s resolutions on the foundation of self-control. We aim to control our appetites so that we lose weight. We aim to exercise our bodies so that we maintain good health. We aim to devote ourselves more intentionally at work so that we can keep our job. We even devote ourselves to reading through the Bible in a year or memorizing Scripture so that we know the Bible better.

In and of themselves, none of these devotions are bad. We all need to pursue goals such as these. But the reality is that the majority of our New Year’s resolutions are addressing sins in our lives and the only way to rightly address sin in our lives is to confess and repent. Here’s what I’m talking about:

1. A resolution to lose weight must begin by confessing the sin of gluttony (Proverbs 23:20-21) and acknowledging to God that we have misdirected worship away from him and toward ourselves (Philippians 3:19).
2. A resolution to devote ourselves more fully at work must be predicated by a confession of slothfulness (Matthew 25:26) and acknowledging that we must work as unto the Lord (Colossians 3:23).
3. A new resolution to read the Bible through in a year and to memorize Scripture must be borne out of a heart of confession for not treasuring Scripture as depicted by the Psalmist (Psalm 119:9-11).

The Lord calls us to repent of our sin, not to merely make a resolution. Many of our New Year’s resolutions fail because they are addressing sins that we have not confessed to the Lord. Confession and repentance are everything. This is true for at least two reasons:

1. We need to understand that all of our sins are sins against God (Psalm 51:4). To refrain from confessing our sins to God and trying to deal with them by merely “turning over a new leaf” in a new year is to dishonor God. It is an act of self-idolatry because our objective is to do right, on our own, and for our own sake. In such a situation, God is neither the means nor the end of our resolution—we are!
2. Raw and rugged willpower will not suffice! We are fallen and finite and we will experience “self-control fatigue.” We are desperate for God to enable us to live holy lives that honor Him in all that we do. We can never begin to do so without His gracious enabling—and He will not enable what is, in truth, unconfessed sin.

We must not merely make meaningless New Year’s resolutions that are an affront to our righteous and holy God. Rather, we must be about New Year’s repentance so that we have a chance at living a life of worship of the One True God in the potential-filled New Year that He has granted us.

The Apostle Paul was inspired to declare to those whom he encountered “that they should repent and turn to God, performing deeds in keeping with their repentance” (Acts 26:20). We, too, should make this our New Year’s practice. We must worship the Lord by repenting of our sinful ways and living according to our repentance. Only then will we be grounded in a resolution worth keeping. Only then will we have any hope of honoring our commitments–which have been made unto the Lord.

As you spend more time in The Shack, you find that Young’s writing is very slippery in a very subtle way. This is the method of false teachers.  In the book of Acts, Paul warns the church as follows:

29 I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; 30 and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away the disciples after them. [Acts 20:29-30]

The stunning reality of this verse is found in the origin of the false teachers.  Paul does not say that the church will be attacked by false teachers (fierce wolves) who kick in the front door and stand before the congregation spewing venomous false teachings.  On the contrary, Paul states that these fierce wolves will “arise from among your own selves.”  In other words, they will seem familiar and at some point in time were welcomed into the gathering.  This is the proverbial wolf in sheep’s clothing.

Another critical observation of this verse shows us that the fierce wolves will speak “twisted things, to draw away the disciples after them.”  The term “twisted things” can best be described as subtle alterations to the truth of Scripture.  These alterations can include:

• slight adjustments to word order in a verse
• subtle omissions or additions of little words or phrases in a verse
• using verses out of their context
• misusing verses in tandem when trying to make a point
• arguing for a wrong definition of a word

Each of these “twists” can totally alter the intended meaning of the inspired Scriptures.  If believed, these twists can draw the disciples away and cause them to follow after them in error.  We see these twists used by Young in The Shack repeatedly.

So, I conclude that The Shack as a whole is contrary to the Bible on a multitude of issues.  It is a book that should not be endorsed as a Christian book.  I don’t necessarily discourage you from reading the book so long as you can stay grounded in the Bible.  It is a good exercise (with caution) for Christians in that it exposes “cultural Christianity” for what it really is:  a false gospel.  Furthermore, reading such books will enable us to know the language and error of the culture so that we can speak to the issues that contradict God’s Word.

However, I do discourage you from ever referring this book to a non-Christian. With no biblical framework to rely upon, they will be enticed to believe wrongly about God (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) and his exclusive offer of salvation through Jesus Christ alone.  Instead, give them the truths of Scripture and pray for the Holy Spirit to wash them with the Gospel of Jesus Christ for the Glory of the Father.

In addition to this, the overall premise of the book demonstrates a lack reverence for God.  Any attempt to depict God in any image or human term is a transgression of the second commandment:

“You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.” [Exodus 20:4]

This truth is also seen in the writings of Luke:

Being then God’s offspring, we ought not to think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of man. [Acts 17:29]

Young’s portrayal of God in The Shack is a modern-day carved image.  Some clutch to this book claiming that it has revitalized their faith.  Some have hailed this book as what drew them to faith in God for the first time.  Tragically, such claims are attributable to the emotional (not biblical) appeal that Young’s portrayal of God offers.  Young has presented God using manmade imagery and many appear to be following after these false images rather than the true God of the Bible.

The worst abuse of this issue is found in Young’s depiction of all three members of the Trinity in the following passage:

Mack was shocked at the scene in front of him.  It appeared that Jesus had dropped a large bowl of some sort of batter or sauce on the floor, and it was everywhere.  It must have landed close to Papa because the lower portion of her skirt and bare feet were covered in the gooey mess.  All three were laughing so hard that Mack didn’t think they were breathing.  Sarayu said something about humans being clumsy and all three started roaring again.  Finally, Jesus brushed past Mack and returned a minute later with a large basin of water and towels. Sarayu had already started wiping the goop from the floor and cupboards, but Jesus went straight to Papa and, kneeling at her feet, began to wipe off the front of her clothes.  He worked down to her feet and gently lifted one foot at a time, which he directed into the basin where he cleaned and massaged it.

“Ooooh, that feels soooo good!” exclaimed Papa, as she continued her tasks at the counter.

As he leaned against the doorway watching, Mack’s mind was full of thoughts.  So this was God in relationship?  It was beautiful and so appealing.  He knew that it didn’t matter whose fault it was—the mess from some bowl had been broken, that a dish that had been planned would not be shared. . . .

. . . .but greasy fingers over there,” Papa nodded toward Jesus, “decided to see if it would bounce.” (pp. 104-05)

The Three Stooges!

What is Young’s goal in writing such?  He has depicted God not only in human terms, but he also portrays the Trinitarian God as a collection of bumbling idiots akin to the Three Stooges.  What’s more, he has Mack think, “So this was God in relationship?  It was beautiful and so appealing.”

To Whom Will You Liken God?

We must be ultra careful in what we do with God when relating to him and communicating about him.  Young certainly would not agree as he has run amuck with imagery of the Father, the Son, and the Spirit throughout the book.  God should not be depicted in human terms.  This includes portraying the Father a large black woman on one extreme and a grey-headed grandfather figure like Gandoff on the other.  God is neither!

To whom then will you liken God, or what likeness compare with him? [Isaiah 40:18]

After sarcastically stating that God’s voice had been reduced to paper (the Bible) 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.”

Well, let’s take a look at Young’s version of “intelligentsia.”  This next passage demonstrates that he has no problem “moderating and deciphering” what Scripture says for the readers of his book.  Put on your seat belt and take a read of this:

“I,” she opened her hands to include Jesus and Papa, “I am a verb.  I am that I am.  I will be who I will be.  I am a verb!  I am alive, dynamic, ever active, and moving.  I am a being verb.”

Mack still felt like he had a blank stare on his face.  He understood the words she was saying, but it just wasn’t connecting yet.

“And as my very essence is a verb,” she continued, “I am more attuned to verbs than nouns.  Verbs such as confessing, repenting, living, loving, responding, growing, reaping, changing, sowing, running, dancing, singing, and on and on.  Humans, on the other hand, have a knack for taking a verb that is alive and full of grace and turning it into a dead noun or principle that reeks of rules:  something growing and alive dies.  Nouns exist because there is a created universe and physical reality, but if the universe is only a mass of nouns, it is dead.  Unless ‘I am,’ there are no verbs, and verbs are what makes the universe alive.”

“And,” Mack was still struggling, although a glimmer of light seemed to begin to shine into his mind.  “And, this means what, exactly?” [p. 204]

Yes, what exactly does this mean?  After reading this, you are probably identifying really well with Mack (who felt like he had a blank stare on his face).  Stay with Mack on this one but don’t let that glimmer of light begin to shine into your mind!

God Is the Great Subject!

I don’t think I have to write very much on this one.  Let me be succinct.  God is not merely a verb.  He is not a “force.”  If you want to describe God in grammatical terms, he is a noun in that he is The Subject.  Of what is he the Subject?  EVERYTHING!  Everything is about God.  Everything finds its source in God.  Does God take action and do things?  Absolutely, but he must be viewed rightly as a noun first.  He is the noun above all nouns (Philippians 2:9).

Who is Young’s Subject?

Contrary to this, Young makes provision for man to think of himself as the subject.  Consider this short statement:

In the silence that followed, Mack simply lay still, allowing the immensity of space and scattered light to dwarf him, letting his perceptions be captured by starlight and the thought that everything was about him… about the human race…that all this was all for us. (p. 113)

Make no mistake, everything is about God–not man!  It seems that Young sees man as the subject of all and God as a verb that serves.  This is nothing but age-old human arrogance–man worshiping himself.  The ultimate end of sin is man thinking everything is about him.  This looks and smells exactly like what Satan would have Eve to think when he tempted her in the Garden by telling her she would “be like God” (Genesis 3:5).

The God of the Bible

There are countless places you can go to in the Bible and see that God is the subject of all things, and not merely a verb.  I dare say that every page of the Bible will support this claim.  Here is an example:

Psalm 97:1-7

1 The LORD reigns, let the earth rejoice;
let the many coastlands be glad!
2 Clouds and thick darkness are all around him;
righteousness and justice are the foundation of his throne.
3 Fire goes before him
and burns up his adversaries all around.
4 His lightnings light up the world;
the earth sees and trembles.
5 The mountains melt like wax before the LORD,
before the Lord of all the earth.
6 The heavens proclaim his righteousness,
and all the peoples see his glory.
7 All worshipers of images are put to shame,
who make their boast in worthless idols;
worship him, all you gods!

We all struggle with the temptation to worship ourselves.  This very day I have had a moment that I have turned my eyes away from God and toward myself.  It is part of the human struggle in our sinful flesh.  We are to fight this temptation and to make no provision for the flesh (Romans 13:14).  The last thing we need is a book like The Shack pouring gasoline on this fire.

So make no mistake, God and his creation does not revolve around us. God is not merely a verb who is “more attuned to verbs.”  God is The Subject who relates to his people.

For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen. [Romans 11:36]

This is a slippery topic in the book.  I will tell you that Young does not explicitly state one way or another who is saved or how they are saved.  This is in great contrast to the Bible where salvation is explicitly explained (from Genesis to Revelation).  Whether he is purposefully vague or ignorantly vague, this is not an issue that vagueness can be excused.  This is the most important issue for all people for all time!

There is one passage in the book that speaks to this issue and what is written can at best be described as “mealy-mouthed.”  Take a look at the passage, and then I’ll take a stab at analyzing parts of it:

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 institution.  I have followers who were murderers and many who were self-righteous.  Some are bankers and bookies, Americans and Iraqis, Jews and Palestinians.  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.”

“Does that mean,” asked Mack, “that all roads will lead to you?”

“Not at all,” smiled Jesus as he reached for the door handle to the shop.  “Most roads don’t lead anywhere.  What it does mean is that I will travel any road to find you.” [p. 182]

I must say that reading this passage results in more questions than conclusions.  There are some vague statements and some contradictory statements rolled up together here that should leave a biblically oriented person leery.

The Danger of “Universalism”

Though not explicitly stated, there are undertones of “universalism” in this passage.  Universalism is defined as the acceptance of other religions or faiths in an inclusive manner, believing in a universal reconciliation between humanity and God regardless of specific doctrinal or theological beliefs.  A clear example of universalism can be found in this statement by former President George W. Bush in a 2007 interview: 

“I believe in an almighty God, and I believe that all the world, whether they be Muslim, Christian, or any other religion, prays to the same God. . . I believe there is a universal God. I believe the God that the Muslim prays to is the same God that I pray to.  After all, we all came from Abraham. I believe in that universality.” 

Former President Jimmy Carter expressed the same sentiments when he said in the days after 9/11 attacks:

“The people of the world must strive to embrace one another and coexist in harmony.  After all, we all worship the same God” [my paraphrase].

Muslims, Hindus, Jews, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and Mormons do not believe in the same God that Christians believe in.  There are a host of reasons why this is true.  The best of those reasons is that the God of Christianity is the triune God who is one God in three persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit).  These three persons cannot be added to or taken away from.  In Christianity, the doctrine of the Trinity is an all or nothing issue.  If there is a faith that prays to a god that is not Father, Son and Spirit, then that faith is not praying to the same God of Christianity.  Rather, that faith is praying to a false god.

There is too much room in Young’s writing for one to conclude that God is universal in his redemption of people.  He is not!  There is a very absolute requirement.  You must believe the following:

1. God created man to worship him.  God commanded man to be obedient and warned that death would be the result of disobedience.  Man sinned in the Garden by disobeying God.  Because one man (the first man, Adam) sinned, all of mankind has sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Gen 2:16-17, Gen 3:6, Rom 3:10-12).
2. To redeem mankind from this fallen condition, God the Father sent his only Son to pay the price (death) for the sins of mankind as a substitute.  The Son, though perfect and without sin, died on the cross for the sins of the world and was buried in a grave (Rom 5:23-26, Heb 9:14, 1 Pet 1:19, Matt 27:59-60).
3. Three days later, the Son rose in bodily form from the dead forever defeating sin and death.  After 40 days of walking on earth and encountering a multitude of witnesses, the Son ascended to the right hand of the Father where he prays for his Church without ceasing (Matt 28:5-7, 1 Cor 15:3-8, Heb 1:3, Heb 7:25).
4. Those who believe in this substitutionary death, burial and resurrection of the Son from the dead will be forever saved and the Spirit will dwell within them (Rom 10:9-10, John 14:15-17).
5. The Son will return to earth one day–a day no one knows.  On that day, he will gather up his Church and they will spend eternity in the presence of the Father, Son, and Spirit.  Those who do not believe will be forsaken for eternity and cast out of the presence of the Father, Son and Spirit (1 Thess 5:1-11, Matt 24:36-51, Luke 13:26-28).

The Gospel is exclusive.  The Bible makes it clear in no uncertain terms that the only way to heaven is through Christ and his redemptive work on behalf of those who believe in him.

Putting Down the Term “Christian”

In yet another confusing passage in the book, Young quotes his fictitious Jesus figure who says, “I have no desire to make them Christian.”  Why would Young have Jesus say that he doesn’t want to make people Christians?  Granted, the term in today’s world is seemingly watered down to mean a broad range of unbiblical possibilities.  Tragically, to some people this term can mean anything from an “American citizen” to a person who merely believes they should live out the “golden rule.”  However, I don’t think this is Young’s point.  I think he is opening the door of universalism.

Biblically, the term Christian means “follower of Christ.”  We see three uses of this title in the New Testament (remember, these are the words God inspired the authors to write).  The first was written by Luke who wrote of Barnabas and Paul and the people they taught in Antioch:

For a whole year they met with the church and taught a great many people. And in Antioch the disciples were first called Christians. [Acts 11:26]

Later in Acts, Luke writes this of Paul and the question of King Agrippa:

And Agrippa said to Paul, “In a short time would you persuade me to be a Christian?” [Acts 26:28]

Another reference to the title “Christian” is found in Peter’s writings:

Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in that name. [1 Peter 4:16]

The term “Christian” ultimately finds its meaning in these words of Jesus:

23 And he said to all, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me. 24 For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will save it. 25 For what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world and loses or forfeits himself? 26 For whoever is ashamed of me and of my words, of him will the Son of Man be ashamed when he comes in his glory and the glory of the Father and of the holy angels. [Luke 9:23-26]

So I would argue that Jesus does want to make people Christians–those who follow after him!  I am inclined to believe (based upon consideration of his book as a whole) that Young is blurring the lines between religions (or faiths) and trying to subtly proclaim a doctrine of “universal salvation” instead of one of “exclusive salvation” that is found only in following after Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

All Roads Lead Somewhere!

The final point that I will address is that of Young quoting his fictitious Jesus as saying, “Most roads don’t lead anywhere.”  This is dangerously untrue!  All roads lead somewhere.  More specifically, all roads lead to one of two places.  There is a single road that exclusively leads to eternal life.  Jesus makes this unquestionably clear when he responds to Thomas’ question the night of his betrayal and arrest:

5 Thomas said to him, “Lord, we do not know where you are going. How can we know the way?” 6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. [John 14:5-6]

Alternatively, we know from the Bible that all other roads lead to rejection and an eternity of being forsaken by God.  Matthew was inspired to quote Jesus who said the following during the Sermon on the Mount:

21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ 23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’ [Matthew 7:21-23]

It is only through faith in Jesus Christ and obedience to his instructions that anyone will enter the kingdom of heaven.  Any attempt to go any other way will result in eternal rejection and judgment.  Believe this:  all roads lead somewhere!

No Bumper Sticker Mentality

Having said this, I want to close by addressing an issue within the American church.  Too often the Church (Christian believers across all denominations) has a sad and sickening “bumper sticker mentality” about their faith.  It is as if their Church or denomination is a sports team of some sort and other churches, denominations, and religions are rivals.  America is full of Christian bumper stickers, license plate frames, fish decals, etc.  I’m not saying such items are wrong in and of themselves, but we must be careful to evaluate the heart behind the use of these things.  Christianity cannot merely be a “brand” that we promote.

My point is, as Christians we believe in the exclusivity of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  We believe what he said–that he is the only way to the Father.  Having said this, we do not use this belief as an arrogant slogan to boast to the world that we are right and will be proven right in the end.  Rather, we must use this belief to humbly and lovingly appeal to others to join us in this belief.  Why?  I’ll offer three reasons:  1.) so that God is glorified; 2.) so that we are obedient to his instruction to do so (Matthew 28:18-20); and 3.) so that those who will believe will be spared from a horrifying eternity.

Accordingly, I don’t refute Young’s writings merely because he is a rival to my brand of faith.  I don’t want to “win” as the world defines victory.  Rather, I want God to be glorified and people to follow Christ and live the victory that he offers to all who would rightly believe in him.  Therefore, to the best of my ability, I strive hard to reason from the Bible and not my feelings or desires.  Should I be wrong, may God use his Word to correct me and those who read what I have written.

In what amounts to a mere half-page of text, Young distorts the cross of Christ and its purpose in God’s work of salvation for his people.  These few words, imbedded in a 248 page book, can be subtly embraced by the complacent reader if read too quickly.  This is why I urge you to read The Shack with the Bible beside it.  This is why I urge you to not promote this book to the non-Christian.

Let me give you the context for this topic.  Mack, explaining the hurt he feels for the loss of his daughter questions God’s compassion and empathy for him.  Here is what Young writes:

“How can you really know how I feel?” Mack asked, looking back into her eyes.

Papa didn’t answer, only looked down at their hands.  His gaze followed hers and for the first time Mack noticed the scars in her wrists, like those he now assumed Jesus also had on his.  She allowed him to tenderly touch the scars, outlines of a deep piercing, and he finally looked up again into her eyes.  Tears were slowly making their way down her face, little pathways through the flour that dusted her cheeks.

“Don’t ever think that what my son chose to do didn’t cost us dearly.  Love always leaves a significant mark,” she stated softly and gently.  “We were there together.”

Mack was surprised.  “At the cross?  Now wait, I thought you left him—you know—’My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?’”  It was a Scripture that had often haunted Mack in The Great Sadness.

“You misunderstand the mystery there.  Regardless of what he felt at that moment, I never left him.” (p. 96)

Problem #1 – Only Jesus Has a Body That Can Scar

The idea that the Father and the Spirit both bear the scars of Jesus is unacceptable fiction.  Only Jesus became human and has a body that can bear scars (even while maintaining his deity).  Only Jesus was nailed to the cross.  The Father struck him and afflicted him (Isaiah 52:13 – 53:12).  The Father did not do this to himself; he did this to his Son.  Nor were the Father and the Spirit there together with the Son.  The Son was forsaken.  The Son was isolated, abandoned, and alone.  (More will be said about this below.)

To some, the Father (and the Spirit) bearing the scars of the Son may sound emotionally appealing.  It may cause some to shed sweet sentimental tears of sympathy, but it is against the Bible and should not be embraced.  Yes, it grieved the Father to give up his one and only Son.  But the Father and the Spirit were not with him, they do not have  bodies, and thus they do not bear scars.

Problem #2 – Forsaken Means Forsaken

Strangely, throughout the book Young portrays Mack as a man who knows his Bible.  It is astonishing to me that he would have a character correctly quote and apply Scripture only to refute him with heresy.  One can only conclude that his apparent disdain for “intelligenstia” is driving this practice.  The Scripture that “haunted” Mack is found in the Gospels of Matthew and Mark.  Here is what Mark was inspired to write:

And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, “Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?” which means, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” [Mark 15:34]

In this verse, Jesus is quoting from Psalm 22 which reads:

My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? Why are you so far from saving me, from the words of my groaning? [Psalm 22:1]

While Jesus hung on the cross, the Father was far from saving him.  The Father’s presence was removed.  The Father had forsaken him.  Jesus knew it.  Yet Young has his fictitious Father figure refute this understanding of Scripture when he writes:

You misunderstand the mystery there.  Regardless of what he felt at that moment, I never left him.

This is not faithful to Scripture!  In the original Greek, the verb “forsaken” (ἐγκαταλείπω) is used 10 times in the New Testament and can be translated as follows:  abandon, desert, leave in straits, leave helpless, totally abandoned, utterly forsaken.  If we trust the Bible, we can only conclude that the Father abandoned the Son.  Any other interpretation requires the reader (Young in this case) to project his desired meaning on the word and reject the inspired, inerrant, and infallible Word of God.

The truth is, God did leave him and forsake him…for the moment.  Why?  We see in Isaiah that “the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all.” [Isaiah 53:6] Because God is holy and cannot be associated with sin, he abandoned him as he punished the sins of the world.  The Son was bearing the sins of his people and therefore enduring God’s wrath.

Problem #3 – Jesus Felt Reality

Before moving on, we must zero in on Young’s amazing extra-biblical insight into what Jesus felt on the cross versus what was reality.  Recall that in response to Mack’s inquiry about the Mark 15:34 passage, Young fictitiously quotes the Father as follows:

Regardless of what he felt at that moment, I never left him.

As I see it, there are two options for understanding Young’s statement and both are horrifyingly wrong!  Consider these two options:

1.) God inspired the writers of Scripture to lie.  If Matthew and Mark were inspired to write “forsaken” in their accounts when it was merely a wrong feeling that Jesus had, then God has inspired the writing of non-truth.  Such is not possible since we know from Scripture that God cannot lie (Hebrews 6:18).  If we were to conclude otherwise (and against Scripture), then where else could we discover lies (or “misunderstandings”)  in Scripture?  Not surprisingly, people like Young will conveniently find ”misunderstandings” in every place that Scripture says something they don’t like. 

Consider some examples of this heretical practice:

Heresy #1:  “So you don’t like authority?  Well that’s just a human concept that comes from total depravity.  God didn’t intend for there to be any hierarchy in his creation.  What about all those verses about hierarchy that quote Jesus, Paul and Peter?  Well, they were just what they felt and, regardless of what they felt, there is no hierarchy in God’s creation.”  See The Shack vs. The Bible 2.

Heresy #2:  “So you don’t like what Scripture says about homosexuality?  Well, those verses are just the words of Paul and Paul’s words don’t mean as much as Jesus’ words and, since Jesus never speaks to the issue, it’s a non-issue.  What’s more, those words against homosexuality in the Old Testament were written under the conditions of a different covenant.  We are new covenant people today and are freed from those words.”

Believing that God inspired writers to write something other than true reality is exactly what the Adversary wants as he strives to destroy the kingdom of God.

2.) Jesus was just flat wrong in his prayer.  If this is true, what else could he have been wrong about?  Maybe that statement of “I am the way, the truth, and the life.  No one comes to the Father except through me” [John 14:6] is another area where he “felt” wrong.  (Watch out for this one in The Shack!  Perhaps I will address this in the next post…)

Neither of these options is acceptable!  You must believe that God did forsake Jesus as the Bible tells us.  Let us commit to make no allowance for the manipulation of Scripture to say what we want it to say!

Here is the raw truth:  When Young quotes his fictitious Father saying, “Regardless of what he felt at that moment, I never left him” the feelings that Young is focused on are his own!  He does not like a God who will abandon the Son (or anyone for that matter).  He does not want to believe that God punishes sin.  This reveals to us that he does not have a true and honest grasp on the wickedness of sin and the holiness of God.  Watch where this will take you…

What’s the Big Deal?

What is the danger of believing as Young writes?  The danger is that we won’t see God for who he really is and we won’t see sin for all that it really is.  It lessens the severity of sin if we believe that the Father did not remove his presence from the Son as he dealt with the sins of the world for all time.  Sin is so bad that the Father forsook the Son unto death, and death on a cross.  Now, to the praise of God, once that sin was dealt with, the Father resurrected the Son (in bodily form) who became the first of those who will walk in newness of life…for eternity (see Romans 6:3-4)!  This is the greatest news ever told!  But for it to be fully great, the Father had to forsake (abandon) the Son.

Yet on this topic, Young reveals his anti-biblical position once again:

I am not who you think I am, Mackenzie.  I don’t need to punish people for sin.  Sin is its own punishment, devouring you from the inside.  It’s not my purpose to punish it; it’s my joy to cure it. (p. 120)

This is exactly what the enemy would like for us to think.  He would like for us to focus on sin and it’s punishment upon on us apart from God and his punishment for sin.  He would like for us to not see sin as it really is:  against God.

Taken at face value, Young’s comment that “sin is its own punishment” is an affront to God.  It gives power and recognition to sin and this power and recognition is taken from God.  To borrow from Young’s language about the Trinity, the enemy would like for us to see sin as a “circular relationship” whereby sin is committed and sin punishes the sinner for sin.  All the while, there is no role for God to play in punishing sin.  After all, as Young and many others would have it, God is no punisher, he is only a lover.  The Bible is very clear on this:  he is BOTH!

Conclusion

It is God’s purpose to punish sin.  He punishes the sin of every human being in one of two ways:

1.)    For Christians, he punished sin for eternity on the cross of Christ.  Those who believe are the beneficiaries of Christ’s substitutionary atonement for their sins.  Those who believe will overcome sin and death for eternity just as Jesus did when the Father raised him from the dead.

2.)    For non-Christians, he will punish sin for eternity on the final Day of Judgment.  Those who do not believe will be punished; will be forsaken; will be abandoned; for all eternity (Matthew 13:47-50).

So I urge you to this end:  believe in God who punishes your sins.  Believe that he made provision for you on the cross of Christ where he forsook his one and only Son for a time.  Believe and you will be delivered from an eternal existence in which you will be fully and finally forsaken by God.  Believe and you will be saved!

A

At this point, there is no contradiction between what I just wrote and what Wm. Paul Young has written in The Shack.  But there is more…

Now, let’s watch Young as he writes about the Trinity.  First, if you have not read the book you must know the characterizations that Young has assigned to each person of the Godhead.  In The Shack, the Father (a.k.a. “Papa” and “Abba”) is in the character of a large black woman named Elousia, the Son is in the character of a middle-aged Jewish carpenter named Jesus, and the Holy Spirit is characterized as a small Asian woman named Sarayu.  We pick up in a dialogue between Mack (Mackenzie) and the three persons of the Godhead where Mack is questioning them about who is in charge of all things in creation:

“I am talking about who is in charge.  Don’t you have a chain of command?”

“Chain of command?  That sounds ghastly!” Jesus said.

“At least binding,” Papa added as they both started laughing, and then Papa turned to Mack and sang, “Though chains be of gold, they are chains all the same.”

“Now don’t concern yourself with those two,” Sarayu interrupted, reaching out her hand to comfort and calm him.  “They’re just playing with you.  This is actually a subject of interest among us.”

“Mackenzie, we have no concept of final authority among us, only unity.  We are in a circle of relationship, not a chain of command or ‘great chain of being’ as your ancestors termed it.  What you’re seeing here is relationship without any overlay of power.  We don’t need power over the other because we are always looking out for the best. 

(Cited from The Shack, p. 122)

Biblical Hierarchy in the Trinity

The Bible speaks frequently to the relationship between the three persons of the Trinity.  Is there a verse that declares a hierarchy within the Trinity?  The closest we get is when Paul writes:

But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. [1 Corinthians 11:3]

Paul’s use of “God” in this verse is a reference to the Father.  Paul clearly shows (under inspiration!) a hierarchical relationship between the Son and the Father.  Additionally, there are plenty of verses that show a hierarchical concept.  Here is a sampling:

1.      The Father created all things through the Son:

. . . but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. [Hebrews 1:2]

See also: John 1:3, Colossians 1:16

2.      The Father planned redemption and sent the Son into the world:

4 But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, 5 to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons. [Galatians 4:4-5]

See also: John 3:16-17

3.      The Son obeyed the Father:

6 [Christ Jesus] who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. [Philippians 2:6-8]

See also:  John 4:34, John 5:19, John 6:38

4.      The Holy Spirit does not speak on his own authority:

13 When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. 14 He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you. [John 16:13-14]

See also:  John 14:26, John 15:26, John 16:7

From this we see that the three persons of the Trinity are equal in status, yet different in role.  While they are equally God, the Son does submit to the authority of the Father and the Holy Spirit does submit to the authority of the Father and the Son.  Another strong testimony to the obedient submission of the Son to the Father is found in John 17.  Read it and see if you agree!  The ultimate testimony to the Son’s obedience is found in the Garden of Gethsemane when Jesus prays:

“My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will.” [Matthew 26:39]

It is not possible to be faithful to the Scriptures and believe this to mean anything other than the Son submitted to the authority of the Father!  Therefore, hierarchy is found in the Trinity when one considers what God inspired to be written.

Returning to The Shack, Young continues…

“Hierarchy would make no sense among us.  Actually, this is your problem, not ours.”

“Really?  How so?”

“Humans are so lost and damaged that to you it is almost incomprehensible that people could work or live together without someone being in charge.”

“But every human institution that I can think of, from political to business, even down to marriage, is governed by this kind of thinking; it is the web of our social fabric,” Mack asserted.

“Such a waste!” said Papa, picking up the empty dish and heading for the kitchen. . .

 “You humans are so lost and damaged that to you it is almost incomprehensible that relationship could exist apart from hierarchy.  So you think that God must relate inside a hierarchy like you do.  But we do not.”

(Cited from The Shack, pp. 122, 124)

Biblical Hierarchy in Human Relationships

This is an amazing text to observe.  The author (Young) has his fictional character rightly proclaim that the “web of our social fabric” is hierarchy-based.  He then has his fictional Godhead refute Mack contrary to what the real Godhead inspired to be written!  I contend that the web of our social fabric has at its roots the Bible.  Here are some supporting biblical texts:

1.      God designed governments and He has delegated His authority to them:

1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. [Romans 13:1-2]

See also: 1 Peter 2:13-17

2.      God calls employees to submit to the authority of their employers:

Servants, be subject to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the unjust. [1 Peter 2:18]

See also: Ephesians 6:5-9

3.      God calls wives to submit to the authority of their husbands:

22 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. [Ephesians 5:22-24] 

See also: 1 Peter 3:1-7

4.      God calls children to submit to the authority of their parents:

Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. [Ephesians 6:1]

5.      God calls church members to submit to the authority of their pastors:

7 Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God. . . . 17 Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you. [Hebrews 13:7, 17]

From these citations we see that authority, hierarchy, and submission are designed by God!  This is God’s instruction to us through His inspired Scriptures.  Young would have us believe that the concept of hierarchy is a mere confusion on the part of messed-up humanity as he fictitiously quotes God:  “Humans are so lost and damaged that to you it is almost incomprehensible that people could work or live together without someone being in charge.”  We believe someone has authority because God appoints those to be in authority and delegates His authority to them!  Where did we get this?  From God’s Word!

The End of the Line

If we strip away authority in the Bible, and in God’s Trinitarian existence, and in God’s created order, we are tempted to keep on stripping until we render even God to be without authority over mankind whom he created.  In an amazingly tragic line of false teaching, we see Young do this very thing in the following quote (by his fictitious Jesus):

“That’s the beauty you see in my relationship with Abba and Sarayu.  We are indeed submitted to one another and have always been so and always will be.  Papa is as much submitted to me as I to him, or Sarayu to me, or Papa to her.  Submission is not about authority and it is not obedience; it is all about relationships of love and respect.  In fact, we are submitted to you in the same way.”

(Cited from The Shack, p. 145)

Read that last sentence one more time.  God is submitted to man in the same way?  God is submitted to man?  God is submitted?  There are a multitude of verses that refute this heresy.  I urge you to read the book of Job and consider God in light of His confrontation with Job (Job 38-41).  There is not even a hint of God submitting to Job in these verses.  Nor is there even a miniscule hint of God submitting to anyone or anything in any line of Scripture!

In his arrogance, Young quotes his fictitious Holy Spirit saying:  “Hierarchy would make no sense among us.  Actually, this is your problem, not ours.”  On the contrary!  It is not a “problem,” it is a design; and it is not “ours,” it is God’s.

What is the Motive?

The Shack is written by a man who does not embrace authority.  He is anti-authoritarian through and through.  He began his assault by downplaying the authority of the Scriptures (see previous post).  If you can relegate the Word of God to be a man-made reduction of God by those in “intelligentsia,” then you can move from there to contradict everything the Bible claims.  In this case, he attempts to assault the idea of biblical authority and submission amongst the members of the Trinity.  From there he attacks the biblical concept of humans relating to one another out of respect for the authority God has delegated.  Finally, he comes full circle by proposing that God is submitted to man!   

This is exactly what the serpent tempted Eve with in the Garden.  While being tempted, Eve tells Satan that God commanded them not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, lest they die.  But Satan replied:

You will not surely die. For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil. [Genesis 3:4-5]

Ultimately, Young’s logic would have us to “be like” God in that we are in the “circle of relationship” with God where God and man are submitted to one another with no hint of hierarchy, authority, or superiority.  This is fatal ground to be treading upon!  This is lethal!  This will kill your soul.

Important!!!

With this in mind, it is important to consider one final point.  Throughout human history, mankind has abused the delegated authority that God has bestowed upon him.  The carnage is widespread:

• There are governments that wage unjust war on vulnerable people and nations
• There are corrupt police officers who arrest people based upon race, gender, etc.
• There are employers who take advantage of employees and their families
• There are husbands who are passive or abusive of their wives physically and mentally
• There are parents who abuse their children and frustrate them intentionally
• There are pastors who neglect their flock and use their role for personal gain

NOTE:  No person should ever submit to one in authority when such submission puts them in danger or causes them to sin against God!  Such “authority” is abusing what God has delegated and must not be submitted to.

This is all true and the list could go on without an end in sight.  However, no human can disregard God’s created order because of the abuses of authority that mankind has committed.  That is to determine that God has made a mistake and mankind is going to have to compensate for it.  The truth is, man has made the mistake!  What’s more, God has compensated for it by providing His one of a kind Son to die for the sins of man so that man can once again be right with Him!  This is the most incredible fact of creation history!  Believing this is what defines a Christian.

We must believe this truth and, in obedience to Jesus, revere those to whom He has given authority.  And all the while, we must pray that they too will submit to Him and serve Him by leading with love, and humility, and respect, and honor.  We must pray that they would lead as servants…just as Jesus did.

An Appeal

I urge you to be careful with The Shack.  If you read it, have the Bible close at hand.  Alertly compare The Shack to the Bible and, where the two differ, hold tight to the Bible…the perfect Word of God!