The Shack

[Richard_1]

THE SHACK




There has been much being said about the "Shack". In the book the "Shack" which is a novel about a man who has a crisis of faith and meets God in the shack where his daughter was murdered. It is supposed to be the way God revealed Himself to this man. In the book there are several points that seem to be in direct opposition to the scriptures concept of God.




1)God and the Holy Spirit are female in appearance




In the "Shack" it presents God and Holy Spirit as female in physical appearance. God the Father who, according to the scriptures, cannot be seen (John 6:46; 1 Tim. 6:16), is called "Papa" and is depicted as being a big black woman that calls herself Elousia. In the scriptures God speaks of Himself (not herself) and says that He is the "I am" and is referred to as YHWH or Adoni Jehovah not Elousia.



Then we have the Holy Spirit being referred to as a woman of the Fareast (Asian) and is named Sarayu. The problem I have with the name Sarayu is that it is the name of a holy river in Indian and Hindu mythology. The other problem is that no where in scripture is the Holy Spirit referred to as a woman, the Holy Spirit never appears as an individual, but as a dove (Matt. 3:15), wind (John 3:5), and fire (Acts 2:3).




2) Minimizing the Truth And Spiritual Sufficiency Of God’s Holy Scriptures




The "Shack" elevates human experience and minimizes the Bible and doctrinal truth. It promotes an understanding especially, pertaining to, or derived from, one's own consciousness and personal experience, in distinction from external sources (scriptural context and knowledge) when it involves God. This is seen here from this excerpt from the book

"God's voice had been reduced to paper, and even that paper had to be moderated and deciphered by the proper authorities and intellect."

"Nobody wanted God in a box, just in a book."

Our relationship with God and others must be built on the doctrinal revelation and foundation set forth in His Holy Scriptures. The scriptures strongly sets the foundation of the absolute truth and spiritual sufficiency (2 Peter 1:2-4; Jude 1:3; Titus 1:9; 2 Timothy 1:13-14; 2 Timothy 4:2-4).



3) Denial Of God’s Sovereign Authority And His Creation Of A Hierarchical Authority Structure




The Shack says this about God

"Papa" declares to Mack, "So you think that God must relate inside a hierarchy like you do? But we do not."

The scriptures say God the Father sent the Son; as a man, the Son submitted to the authority of the Father to the place of dying on the cross; and the Spirit submitted to the Father and Son in bringing sinners to faith in Christ through the Gospel message. This is the hierarchy of the Godhead in the scriptures, this is a perfect hierarchy without anger, malice, envy or competition, but a hierarchy nonetheless.


The Shack says of God and His authority

"Once you have hierarchy you need rules to protect and administer it, and then you need law and the enforcement of the rules, and you end up with some kind of chain of command or system of order that destroys relationship rather than promotes it. Hierarchy imposes laws and rules and you end up missing the wonder of relationship that we intended for you."

Mack was surprised. ‘How could that be?’ Why would the God of the universe want to be submitted to me?’

In the book the "Shack" denies the exercise of the sovereign authority of God over mankind. God (the Father, and the Son, and the Spirit) is and always will be the sovereign ruler over everything and every one. In the scriptures from the Old Testament to the book of Revelation, God is repeatedly described as being worshipped and served by angels and men, never the reverse ("Why would the God of the universe want to be submitted to me").


4) The "Shack" says by indication that the Crucifixion and death on the cross-happened to God the Father




The idea that the Father was crucified is precisely what we find in The Shack.

"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"



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."

"I’m sorry that you, that Jesus, had to die" to which Papa responds, "…we aren’t sorry at all. It was worth it

This contradicts the scriptures and is nothing but a form of a doctrine known as "patripassionism", which was a heresy that taught that God the Father also suffered on the cross. According to the NT the person of the Father has no body of flesh and bones like Jesus, the Son did. Patripassionism is the belief that God the Father was incarnate and suffered on the cross. This is problematic in the context of the doctrine of the trinity because the scriptures record Jesus Christ as speaking to God the Father while he was on the cross. It is also problematic for all those who hold to the idea and fact that God the Father is not subject to harm and the unchangeableness of the divinity that is the Father, as it implies that God the Father can suffer harm.

"When WE three spoke our self into human existence as the Son of God, WE became fully human."

This seems to be indicating a form of modalness (God that can appear as the time needs as three different modes[appearance, form, or disposition taken by a thing, or by one of its essential properties or attributes].). This is like saying that it is one God who plays three different characters.



5) A Denial Of The Exercise Of The Deity Of Jesus During His Earthly Ministry



In the Shack it speaks of Jesus in this fashion

But what about the miracles? The healings? Raising people from the dead? Doesn’t that prove that Jesus was God – you know more than humans?" (Papa) No, it proves that Jesus is truly human."

Jesus as a human being, had no power within himself to heal anyone."

This most certainly indicates that Jesus was just a man while on earth. This is a long standing doctrinal falsehood called Kenotic Theology . Kenosis in Greek means to empty and Kenotic Theology teaches that Jesus emptied Himself of His divinity to come to earth. This was a part of Christian liberalism taught in Germany in the 1900’s. By saying that Jesus had no power to heal anyone is saying that Jesus did not have the power of being God in him at that time and seems to be teaching Kenotic Theology in the Shack.



6) Denying that faith alone in the Redemptive death of Jesus as the only way of salvation.



In the "Shack" it says this

"I am the BEST way any human can relate to Papa and Sarayu."

The word "best" in that statement has the connotation of there being other "not so best" but, nevertheless, other ways to relate to Papa (God) and Sarayu (the Holy Spirit). In the scriptures it plainly says that it is Jesus who is the only way to God, not just the best of other ways to God.

John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

This mind set shown in the "Shack" is quite clearly Universalism (universal salvationl). Here we have other statement from the "Shack" that show the indications of Universalism.

In Jesus, I have forgiven all humans."Those who love me come from every system that exists. They were Buddhists or Mormons, Baptist or Muslims Democrats, Republicans and many who don’t vote or are not part of any Sunday morning or religious institutions. 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 Christians.

This seems to be depicting a multi path way of systems that lead to God. The statement about Jesus of the "Shack" saying he had no desire to make them Christians is in contradiction of the scriptures. In the scriptures the followers of Jesus were called Christians and now Jesus in the "Shack" is saying He doesn’t want to make them followers of Him seems to be opening the door for all of whatever way will be saved.



7) The denial of punishment for sin



In the "Shack" this is said about punishment for sin

"At that Papa stopped her preparations and turned toward Mack. He could see a deep sadness in her eyes. "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."

But the in the scriptures it very clear that because of His holy and righteous nature, God "must" judge and punish every sin. The Bible clearly declares that God exacts direct punishment on men for their sins, but for us a followers and believers in Jesus that judgement and punishment has been deferred because of the substitutionary sacrifice of Jesus on the cross for our sins.





8) God has to be reconciled to the world




In the "Shack" it says this

Honey, you asked me what Jesus accomplished on the cross; so now listen to me carefully: Through his death and resurrection, I AM NOW FULLY RECONCILED TO THE WORLD."

But plainly in scripture it says that God was reconciling the world to Himself not Himself to the world. In saying God is reconciled to the world speaks of a change in God or the position of God to the world when what happened was God changing the world to fit His Holiness.

2 Corinthians 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

Also in the scriptures you find that we are called to be reconciled to God not God reconciled to us

2 Corinthians 5:20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.

With all this I believe that the Shack is quite unsound in its concept and precept of God and should be avoided as a book to base a relationship with God on.

[Onesiphorus]

Amen Richard

[canny]

from a different perspective,,, as in ,,, reading a novel, I thought the relationship between the 3 was a helpeful insight. Its a very difficult concept, and simplifying it to get ya head round, I think has done no harm.

[canny]

Richard, could you describe God to me in your own words ?
could you describe your experience , in your own words ?

[laterunner]

Check this out as always you should==================>

LIVING WELL: The Shack - My Thoughts and Others - Donna Edwards

[Galaen]

My understanding of the reasoning behind God the Father appearing as a woman (be she black or white really makes no difference) was because of a poor relationship history and to show God's feminine side. I have to echo Canny here and say that I do not think any harm has been done here. More likely to be that some folks now have a better understanding of God's love for them - if that is the case, then bring it on brother.

[Onesiphorus]

whose God is more understandable ,the God of the Bible ,or the God in the imaginations of an author ,so if I wrote a book and wrote that God was a talking pink pony who loved eating popcorn and burgers and watched daytime TV that would be OK

[Richard_1]

Canny wrote

from a different perspective,,, as in ,,, reading a novel, I thought the relationship between the 3 was a helpeful insight. Its a very difficult concept, and simplifying it to get ya head round, I think has done no harm.

Galaen wrote

My understanding of the reasoning behind God the Father appearing as a woman (be she black or white really makes no difference) was because of a poor relationship history and to show God's feminine side. I have to echo Canny here and say that I do not think any harm has been done here. More likely to be that some folks now have a better understanding of God's love for them - if that is the case, then bring it on brother.

What you seem to have missed is that only 1 point was about God being female but what about the rest of the points that the book teaches

2) Minimizing the Truth And Spiritual Sufficiency Of God’s Holy Scriptures




The "Shack" elevates human experience and minimizes the Bible and doctrinal truth. It promotes an understanding especially, pertaining to, or derived from, one's own consciousness and personal experience, in distinction from external sources (scriptural context and knowledge) when it involves God. This is seen here from this excerpt from the book

"God's voice had been reduced to paper, and even that paper had to be moderated and deciphered by the proper authorities and intellect."

"Nobody wanted God in a box, just in a book."

Our relationship with God and others must be built on the doctrinal revelation and foundation set forth in His Holy Scriptures. The scriptures strongly sets the foundation of the absolute truth and spiritual sufficiency (2 Peter 1:2-4; Jude 1:3; Titus 1:9; 2 Timothy 1:13-14; 2 Timothy 4:2-4).



3) Denial Of God’s Sovereign Authority And His Creation Of A Hierarchical Authority Structure




The Shack says this about God

"Papa" declares to Mack, "So you think that God must relate inside a hierarchy like you do? But we do not."

The scriptures say God the Father sent the Son; as a man, the Son submitted to the authority of the Father to the place of dying on the cross; and the Spirit submitted to the Father and Son in bringing sinners to faith in Christ through the Gospel message. This is the hierarchy of the Godhead in the scriptures, this is a perfect hierarchy without anger, malice, envy or competition, but a hierarchy nonetheless.


The Shack says of God and His authority

"Once you have hierarchy you need rules to protect and administer it, and then you need law and the enforcement of the rules, and you end up with some kind of chain of command or system of order that destroys relationship rather than promotes it. Hierarchy imposes laws and rules and you end up missing the wonder of relationship that we intended for you."

Mack was surprised. ‘How could that be?’ Why would the God of the universe want to be submitted to me?’

In the book the "Shack" denies the exercise of the sovereign authority of God over mankind. God (the Father, and the Son, and the Spirit) is and always will be the sovereign ruler over everything and every one. In the scriptures from the Old Testament to the book of Revelation, God is repeatedly described as being worshipped and served by angels and men, never the reverse ("Why would the God of the universe want to be submitted to me").


4) The "Shack" says by indication that the Crucifixion and death on the cross-happened to God the Father




The idea that the Father was crucified is precisely what we find in The Shack.

"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"



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."

"I’m sorry that you, that Jesus, had to die" to which Papa responds, "…we aren’t sorry at all. It was worth it

This contradicts the scriptures and is nothing but a form of a doctrine known as "patripassionism", which was a heresy that taught that God the Father also suffered on the cross. According to the NT the person of the Father has no body of flesh and bones like Jesus, the Son did. Patripassionism is the belief that God the Father was incarnate and suffered on the cross. This is problematic in the context of the doctrine of the trinity because the scriptures record Jesus Christ as speaking to God the Father while he was on the cross. It is also problematic for all those who hold to the idea and fact that God the Father is not subject to harm and the unchangeableness of the divinity that is the Father, as it implies that God the Father can suffer harm.

"When WE three spoke our self into human existence as the Son of God, WE became fully human."

This seems to be indicating a form of modalness (God that can appear as the time needs as three different modes {appearance, form, or disposition taken by a thing, or by one of its essential properties or attributes}.). This is like saying that it is one God who plays three different characters.



5) A Denial Of The Exercise Of The Deity Of Jesus During His Earthly Ministry



In the Shack it speaks of Jesus in this fashion

But what about the miracles? The healings? Raising people from the dead? Doesn’t that prove that Jesus was God – you know more than humans?" (Papa) No, it proves that Jesus is truly human."

Jesus as a human being, had no power within himself to heal anyone."

This most certainly indicates that Jesus was just a man while on earth. This is a long standing doctrinal falsehood called Kenotic Theology . Kenosis in Greek means to empty and Kenotic Theology teaches that Jesus emptied Himself of His divinity to come to earth. This was a part of Christian liberalism taught in Germany in the 1900’s. By saying that Jesus had no power to heal anyone is saying that Jesus did not have the power of being God in him at that time and seems to be teaching Kenotic Theology in the Shack.



6) Denying that faith alone in the Redemptive death of Jesus as the only way of salvation.



In the "Shack" it says this

"I am the BEST way any human can relate to Papa and Sarayu."

The word "best" in that statement has the connotation of there being other "not so best" but, nevertheless, other ways to relate to Papa (God) and Sarayu (the Holy Spirit). In the scriptures it plainly says that it is Jesus who is the only way to God, not just the best of other ways to God.

John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

This mind set shown in the "Shack" is quite clearly Universalism (universal salvation). Here we have another statement from the "Shack" that shows the indications of Universalism.

In Jesus, I have forgiven all humans."Those who love me come from every system that exists. They were Buddhists or Mormons, Baptist or Muslims Democrats, Republicans and many who don’t vote or are not part of any Sunday morning or religious institutions. 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 Christians.

This seems to be depicting a multi path way of systems that lead to God. The statement about Jesus of the "Shack" saying he had no desire to make them Christians is in contradiction of the scriptures. In the scriptures the followers of Jesus were called Christians and now Jesus in the "Shack" is saying He doesn’t want to make them followers of Him seems to be opening the door for all of whatever way will be saved.



7) The denial of punishment for sin



In the "Shack" this is said about punishment for sin

"At that Papa stopped her preparations and turned toward Mack. He could see a deep sadness in her eyes. "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."

But the in the scriptures it very clear that because of His holy and righteous nature, God "must" judge and punish every sin. The Bible clearly declares that God exacts direct punishment on men for their sins, but for us as followers and believers in Jesus that judgement and punishment has been deferred because of the substitutionary sacrifice of Jesus on the cross for our sins.





8) God has to be reconciled to the world




In the "Shack" it says this

Honey, you asked me what Jesus accomplished on the cross; so now listen to me carefully: Through his death and resurrection, I AM NOW FULLY RECONCILED TO THE WORLD."

But plainly in scripture it says that God was reconciling the world to Himself not Himself to the world. In saying God is reconciled to the world speaks of a change in God or the position of God to the world when what happened was God changing the world to fit His Holiness.

2 Corinthians 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

Also in the scriptures you find that we are called to be reconciled to God not God reconciled to us

2 Corinthians 5:20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.

With all this I believe that the Shack is quite unsound in its concept and precept of God and should be avoided as a book to base a relationship with God on.

[Jay Dub]

Richard

I hope you don't mind me asking but I was wondering if you read the book

[Wabco]

...good question Jay Dub.


Obviously (I have read the book) this book is fiction and anyone who gets hot under the collar about it should calm down and realise it is not to replace the Bible, God's Word, it is a creative piece of writing, and a very good one at that. I believe it is inspired by the Holy Spirit, but why not read it yourself and make your own mind up, it is only a book!!! God can and does speak to us in many ways.........