|
| The Shack: Where Tragedy Confronts Eternity | 
 enlarge | Author: William Paul Young
Creator: Roger Mueller
Publisher: Oasis Audio
Category: Book
List Price: $27.99
Buy New: $17.66
You Save: $10.33 (37%)
New (29) Used (10) from $17.00
Avg. Customer Rating:  1847 reviews
Sales Rank: 444
Format: Audiobook, Cd
Media: Audio CD
Edition: First Edition, Unabridged
Number Of Items: 7
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.3
Dimensions (in): 6.4 x 5.4 x 0.7
ISBN: 1598594192
Dewey Decimal Number: 813.6
EAN: 9781598594195
ASIN: 1598594192
Publication Date: July 1, 2008
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Condition: INTERNATIONL SHIPPING!!! SHIPS from 5 locations based on your Zip Code and availability! (PA TN IN OR SC) *-* Gift Quality *-* Orders Processed Immediately! - We get your book to you Very Quickly!
|
| Customer Reviews:
 Bad Theology Meets Bad Writing December 25, 2007
167 out of 206 found this review helpful
I read this book to see what all the fuss was about. What I found was a book that has the potential to do a lot of harm and very little good.
I'll leave the plot summaries to other reviewers. Instead, I want to address three serious flaws in the book: (1) it does not deal in a helpful way with the problem that is supposedly at its heart, (2) it portrays God without reverence as a being who is not holy, just, fair, or better than humans, and (3) the book is consistently anti-intellectual and basically ignores the human aspects of the relationship between God and mankind, while pretending to explain it in a few little catchphrases.
First, the book is about healing - it is supposed to explain how the main character, Mack, found healing after suffering "The Great Sadness," the horrible murder of his daughter. The first fundamental flaw is that it never does this in a useful or helpful way. While much of what William Young says about God and God's attitude towards people is true, the neat and tidy solutions the book presents are irrelevant to almost any real-world pain.
Rarely is justice served in the here-and-now, complete with restored relationships, an absence of pain, and direct reassurance from God that our loved ones are safe and happy in heaven. God rarely, if ever, works that way. Pain and suffering require better solutions than a fictional story about how God fixed almost every hurt in one family's life through a miraculous intervention. Miracles are the exception; pain without God directly speaking to us is the norm. A book about God's relationship to us in our pain and suffering which fails to recognize this is worse than useless; it is misleading and actually capable of creating more problems than it solves.
Second, the book has an even greater flaw: it simultaneously portrays God as too much like us, while presenting a God who doesn't care much what we believe or what we do with our time on Earth. The Jesus of the Bible says, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6). He also says, "Broad is the road that leads to destruction" (Matthew 7:13). The Jesus of "The Shack" says things like, "I am the best [as opposed to only] way any human can relate to [the Father] or [the Holy Spirit]" (page 110), "I'm not asking you to believe anything" (page 119), or, when asked whether all roads lead to God, "Most roads don't lead anywhere" (page 182).
Further, the god of "The Shack" is not holy or just - while the God of the Bible feels anger over the sins of the world, even while forgiving sinners, the god of "The Shack" never gets angry. The real God tells us to have faith, work hard, love each other, and be content with what He gives us; Young's god tells us she doesn't care about faith, or what we do on our own, or our love for each other unless it's really about her, or contentment with social order. No, Young's god will submit to *us* in the same way we submit to her. Young wants radicals who devalue work, authority, and respect, and refuse to acknowledge that God does not usually take care of everything, without our participation.
Third, the book is consistently anti-intellectual. In "The Shack": seminaries are portrayed as godless, dead places, which teach nothing about love or relationship; reading the Bible is unimportant; regular prayer is unimportant; theology is unimportant. The Jesus of the Bible asks us to come to Him and trust Him; our justification before God depends on it. The Jesus of "The Shack," however, will chase us down and is unconcerned with faith. It's far easier to do what Young has done and paint seminaries, theology, authority, and the wisdom of the Bible as useless and old, than it is to try to understand the real, holy, and timeless God, who does not always explain His actions to us.
Perhaps the best indicator of how flawed Young's theology is can be found in the fact that he embraces the theology of Jacques Ellul, a self-described "Christian anarchist." Ellul rejects the existence of hell; all people, regardless of faith, he says, will be saved. This is not the biblical God. Ellul's god is firstly human, secondly divine. The God of the Bible, in contrast, is the only being who exists independently, the "I AM." God is not human; far from it.
All in all, "The Shack" is a dangerously flawed book. People who need answers would do far better to turn to the Bible - the book of Job is a great starting place - a pastor, or even a good friend and a cup of coffee.
The Shack: A Building Without A Foundation March 30, 2008
147 out of 194 found this review helpful
The biggest flaw in The Shack centers on the nature of God. This is most evident in regards to the great doctrine of the Trinity. In The Shack Young gives his readers a visual picture of the Trinity when Mack, the main character meets God. Mack, much to his surprise, finds upon meeting God the Father that he/she is an African American woman who goes by the name "Papa." Papa we read is frequently in the kitchen cooking and baking such things as pies and scones. The Holy Spirit is an Asian woman whose name is Sarayu, who is a keeper of the gardens.
To much less surprise, Jesus is a Middle-Eastern man. Jesus, as portrayed by Young, comes off as somewhat effeminate as he likes to hold hands, hug, kiss, smile, giggle, act goofy, and wink. He is also clumsy!
In one scene in the kitchen, all three persons of the Godhead are laughing at Jesus because he dropped some sauce that got everywhere, including Papa's skirt and feet. Papa later said at the dinner table, "We were going to have this incredible Japanese sauce, but greasy fingers over there (reference to Jesus) decided to see if it would bounce."
"C'mon now," Jesus responded in mock defense. "My hands were slippery. What can I say?"
"Papa winked at Mack as she passed him the rice. "You can't get good help around here."
"Everyone laughed" (105).
It makes me wonder, among other things, that if Jesus cannot handle a bowl of sauce without dropping it and making a mess, how can He handle our lives and the workings of the world? But I move on.
I conclude that Young misrepresents the doctrine of the Trinity. He seeks to humanize the Godhead, or bring it down to our level. I am not sure whether Young is simply trying to make the Godhead more understandable (and therefore commits a theological error), or if he himself is confused on the nature of the Godhead, or both. To make God out to be three different characters, two women and one man, is to promote the idea of tri-theism, that there is three gods. God is Spirit, which means He does not have human flesh; He is immaterial. Therefore one must trend ever so cautiously when seeking to describe God, and ascribe to Him a human form. We must guard against creating God in our image. This is the problem in representing the Godhead as two women and one man as it is misrepresenting the Biblical view of God, for it promotes the idea of three individuals who are each God and therefore producing three gods.
The doctrine of the Trinity is a very complex statement about God that is taught in Scripture, and it is best to stay within the Scriptural bounds on the issue of the Godhead and be ever so careful not to walk outside those bounds and say something about the nature of God that Scripture never intended to say. However, to have three individuals or persons (as in The Shack) who when asked who is God, all proclaim "I am," it appears to me that one has just distorted the Biblical doctrine of the Godhead and promoted tri-theism.
It is surprising to see how Mack reacts with being in the presence of God. When he meets God, whom he addresses as "Papa," he is shocked and surprised, but mostly angry at God. Mack in an early encounter with Papa throws an accusation her/his way, "If you couldn't take care of Missy, how can I trust you to take care of me?" (92). In saying this Mack's face became "flush angry red" and "his hands were knotted into fists." How does Papa respond? By apologizing! "Mack, I'm so sorry...."
Let's think about Job for a minute. If anyone has ever had a right to be angry with God, Job is the man. Job lost all his possessions, his children, his health, and was left with a nagging wife! After some time of questioning what was going on in his life and questioning God, Job gets a response, but certainly not one that he anticipated! God unleashes a series of questions upon Job that demonstrate His creative power, sovereignty, and wisdom, and God questions whether Job himself also has these attributes, and if not, then the proper response from Job is to be quiet and to trust Him. To which Job properly responds by saying, "Behold, I am insignificant; what can I reply to you? I lay my hand on my mouth." God does not even mention the suffering of Job, let alone give a reason for it. When Job comes into the presence of God, he does not accuse. He is humbled, He does not find fault with God. He repents. If all one took from the book of Job is that we dare not throw accusations at God, it will be a lesson worth learning. However, this is not a lesson taught in The Shack.
Or think of Isaiah having a vision and seeing the "Lord sitting upon His throne, high and lifted up..." Isaiah goes on to describe the scene where seraphim were calling out in the presence of God: "Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts; the whole earth is full of His glory!" What did Isaiah do in response to being in the presence of God? He was astonished and fearful and declared that he was unclean! I am sorry, but Isaiah did not have a vision of God is all His glory and see a woman baking scones and listening to funk music! Now don't misunderstand, this is not to put down women who bake or people who listen to modern music. The point is that God in His Holiness is completely unlike us, He is wholly different than humans, He is wholly other. Or as the book rightly states, God is "holy, and wholly other than you" (98). To seek to humanize God is to take away from His glory and holiness. I am sorry, but I have an issue with God being portrayed as a scone and pie baker who listens to funk music! What point is the author trying to convey about God? It just seems to smack of irreverence to me.
Unfortunately, the image The Shack portrays of God is a weak one (a baker?). When Jesus came to earth, He did not reveal Himself through baking pies and scones but by performing miraculous healings, raising people from the dead, and by authoritatively teaching about heavy doctrinal issues. In conclusion, The Shack in many aspects does not line up with Scripture. Therefore, many of its conclusions about God end up being contrary to Scripture at best, and at worst, may be blasphemous. Therefore, The Shack would not be on my recommending reading list as it creates more problems than it does solutions by painting an unbiblical picture of God.
God does work in different ways in different people, however, it then does not follow that every individual's idea, experiences, and thoughts about God are correct. Scripture exhorts us to examine and test everything by the Word of God (1 Thess. 5:21; 1 Jn. 4:1). This would include such material as The Shack. Therefore, if one does decides to read this book, it is crucial that they use discernment and judge it by the truth of Scripture.
It is sad that for Mack, in finding his peace and comfort, he does not find it through the Word of God, nor even prayer, but in an experience. And an experience that does not appear to built upon the solid rock of God's Word.
Don't be expecting the Holy Trinity to act like this in Heaven March 23, 2008
133 out of 183 found this review helpful
I couldn't finish it. I threw the book across the room at the scene where the Jesus character dropped the bowl of sauce on the floor whereupon the members of the Holy Trinity laughed uproariously and the Jesus character mopped the sauce off the feet of the "Father" character who said "ooooh, that feels so good."
Terrible. I think the author will be embarassed he wrote this one day.
 The BEST Fiction Book of 2007 September 8, 2007
98 out of 144 found this review helpful
The BEST work of Fiction I have read in Years. UNEQUIVOCALLY THE Best Fiction Book of 2007.
I am changed. I pray indelibly. My oh my!
Donald Miller, Jim Palmer, Jim Henderson, Jeff Jacobson --- now William P. Young --- refreshing, timely, powerful new voices, gifted story tellers God has raised up to speak to those who need to hear His voice, feel His love, comprehend God's presence today in their lives. This book pierced dimensions of my soul in ways that defy explanation through the written word --- it's just that powerful.
I must tell you I almost delayed reading this book (it was sent to me for review). I just wasn't in the mood for reading something that had a subtitle of "Where Tragedy Confronts Eternity." Don't make the mistake I almost made: You must not delay in reading this book. In fact, get 4 copies and give them to folks.
This story is a unique blessing, supernaturally infectious, and intended to distribute its blessing well beyond the initial reader who comes into contact with its contents. Whatever you're reading, drop it and get this book.
I promised I wouldn't share the story line. I'm going to keep that promise. This book was terribly special to me as I had spent several days last April with my boys smack dab in the midst of the geographic area (the Wallowa) where the story line takes place. Buy this book now. See the website at [...].
I will read this book once a year for the rest of my days. My prayer is that this is the first of many books to come from William P. Young. If no more books are ever written by Mr. Young, I will remain forever grateful for this one.
"Living unloved is like clipping a bird's wings and removing its ability to fly." P. 97. This book renewed the strength in my wings and deepened my appreciation for my ability to soar.
Prepare for lift-off! Soar with The Shack. Mr. Young, I am especially fond of you. Read the book - You will come to understand what I mean.
Bill Dahl
Author, Creator, Editor
[...]
A Tragic and Flawed Book March 25, 2008
96 out of 124 found this review helpful
The Shack is tragic because it is the story of a troubled man who clearly has a false concept of God, who is given yet another set of false concepts of God from the imagination of William Young. Mack started with an idol and ends with a different idol.
Page 65- Mack, "In seminary he had been taught that God had completely stopped having any overt [open, not hid] 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 proper authorities and intellects."
Mack is presented as needing to REALLY KNOW GOD and how to enter into a LIVING RELATIONSHIP with God, of how to understand the human problem of suffering, of how to deal with bitterness and anger, of how to have hope and joy. The Holy Bible is FULL of amazing and manifold revelation of God! Manifold attributes of God are unfolded and HUNDREDS of names of God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are given. And the Holy Spirit, who BREATHED OUT the Sacred Scriptures, is now the believer's DIVINE COMFORTER AND TEACHER... And IN CHRIST, our hearts are now HIS HOME... By the Holy Spirit, Almighty God makes His home in the believer's heart. Indeed, the true Christian life is not religion but a living RELATIONSHIP.
The Bible is full of divine revelation as to suffering, as to depression and anger, bitterness, forgiveness, etc... and THE HOLY SPIRIT is ever present to personalize and apply the truth to hungry hearts. But WY never tells Mack any of this. He never tells him that every real Christian is a believer-priest with the Holy Spirit, the MASTER TEACHER indwelling! WY never points Mack to any of the DIVINELY REVEALED NAMES OF GOD... and there are over 200 of them!
INSTEAD, WY pushes aside the pure and wonderful God-breathed Word of God in favor of his imagination. And thus, WY introduces Mack and all the rest of us to WY's triune God!
1. God the Father is `Papa'... and he is a SHE-- (page 82)- Mack arrived at the shack, knocked on the door, "the door flew open, and he was looking directly into the face of a large beaming African-American woman."... and her name (page 86) is... "You may call me Elousia." How interesting. God in His God breathed book has given divine revelation of His name... In fact, He has revealed Himself by many names. ELOUSIA is not one of them! Yes, the word `ELOUSIA' has historical connections with false gods and has a root meaning of `tenderness'... Is there `tenderness' with the LORD, GOD ALMIGHTY? Yes!
But consider: Let's say, that your name is `John Henry Jones'... but I refuse to call you by your name... I give you a name that I want to use! EVEN ON A HUMAN LEVEL, THAT WOULD BE ARROGANCE and disrespectful.
2. God the Son, Jesus is called Jesus in the book; and the Holy Spirit is shown as an Asian woman (page 87) whose name is Sarayu. Once again, there are many glorious descriptions and names given the blessed Holy Spirit in the pure Word of God. Sarayu is not one of them. Again, much like Elousia, Sarayu has a background in manmade religion... and also means, `air or wind.'
BUT HERE IS WHAT WE HAVE: WY says he wants to show us what God is like; and yet he REJECTS, ignores, counts as unworthy of consideration the God-breathed revelation of Scripture and substitutes with his own creations! This is astonishing. And the masses love him for it!
3. All throughout The Shack, WY sets forth a very humanized god-- all in the name that we need a God that understands us, that loves us, that wants a relationship with us.
And WY's `Papa' god is not only a woman, but she is VISIBLE to Mack and she has the SAME WOUNDS on her body as Jesus... (Page 95)..."...and for the first time Mack noticed the scars in her wrists, like those he [Mack] now assumed Jesus also had on his. She allowed him to tenderly touch the scars, outlines of a deep piercing... tears were slowly making a way down her face...
Note: There is a `theological' name for this false teaching: From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Patripassionism is a Christian heresy from the time of the early church. Its adherents believe that God the Father [Patri] was incarnate and suffered on the cross. This is problematic in the context of the doctrine of the Trinity because the Christian Scriptures record Jesus Christ as speaking to God the Father while he was on the cross.
Let me be plain: On the authority of God's holy Word, there is not the slightest bit of truth in what WY is saying. If one is writing a book about a mere human; and they take `literary liberties with a few of the facts and details... OK... it helped make a good story or a good movie... it was `based on fact'.... But not a true history lesson. HOWEVER, in dealing with Almighty God. To deny and ignore His revelation and to create a god one likes and to set him forth as VISIBLE when He is not-- SUCH is not literary liberty. It's just not the truth.
4. And then... on page 96... When Jesus cried out, "My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?"..... WY's god says, "Regardless of what he [Jesus] felt at that moment, I never left him."
Wow! Now... who shall I believe-- WY? or Jesus? I'll stick with JESUS!
5. Page 119-120... Mack asks the Shack god woman--"Weren't you always running about killing people in the Bible? You just don't seem to fit the bill.... But if you are God, aren't you the one spilling out great bowls of wrath and throwing people into a burning lake of fire?"
WY's created god of his imagination says, "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."
BE IT FROM Mack's misconceptions about God's righteous judgments... set forth in a way to slander the righteous character of the True God or in WY's blatant denial of the holy wrath of God-- IN BOTH CASES, horrifying man pleasing deceptions are set forth!
In a strange twist, WY has his papa/mama god saying, "Lies are one of the easiest places for survivors to run. It gives you a sense of safety, a place where you only have to depend on yourself. But it's a dark place, isn't it?" (page 187)
Such are the deceptions of the Shack book-- The masses run to them. Man has always loved his own creations! Man loves a humanized god. He seeks to hide from the true God revealed in the Word of God and revealed in creation and revealed in the VISIBLE image of the invisible God, Jesus; and made real to human hearts by the indwelling Holy Spirit. But in the end, such hiding only brings darkness!
6. Page 198- "Mackenzie, religion is about having the right answers,...but I am about the process that takes you to the living answer and once you get to him, he will change you from the inside... You may see me in a piece of art, or music, or silence, or through people, or in Creation, or in your joy and sorrow... And you will hear me in the Bible in fresh ways. Just don't look for rules and principles; look for relationship--a way of coming to be with us."
As is often the case, the false and the true are mixed. Such is the case here. By the way the reality is that you can be almost anyone from any background and love the Shack. Why? It has no clear revelation or solutions. Each man is left to his own subjective interpretations.
A false dichotomy: The informal fallacy of false dilemma involves a situation in which two alternative statements are held to be the only possible options, when in reality there exists one or more other options which have not been considered. The concept is also known as false choice, false dichotomy, falsified dilemma,
WY once again sets up a false dichotomy: 1. On the one hand we have all of Mack's false concepts about God, about the Bible and about church... 2. Then WY will produce his solution in some form of his subjective, humanized sweet all love god.
WHEN ALL THE WHILE,
1. Yes, Mack has some real problems... many folk do; and there are real, even major problems in the churches... In fact-- A lot of what claims to be God's church, according to the Word of God, is not! She is harlot. She is not bride. She is broad road to destruction.... With a multitude of options, ideas, and experiences.
2. But the REAL solution is not found in subjective imagination or humanistic creation. You see, the problem is not that the Bible and/or Biblical Christianity has been tried and found lacking. The sad reality for most... and certainly for Mack... BIBLICAL CHRISTIANITY and the true triune God had never been experienced.
From page 202, it is clear that Mack only had a `works' concept of how to relate to God. He was a stranger to grace through faith in Jesus Christ.
WY IN 248 PAGES NEVER CLEARLY SETS FORTH THE BIBLICAL TRIUNE GOD NOR THE PROFOUND GOSPEL OF GOD'S AMAZING GRACE.
Grace to you!
James Bell
[...]
|
|
|
Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| |
