"The Shack" has a great many good qualities and a few very dangerous
ones. It is a simply written, highly imaginative, vividly portrayed
sketch of a man's individual spiritual journey to wholeness in the face
of very real, extraordinarily difficult circumstances. If for nothing
else, this book is to be commended for taking what may be the rawest
kind of life circumstances and dealing with their very real and lasting
effects on our spiritual and emotional person. What it states, very
powerfully, is that through Christ, men and women can find peace after
great horror.
Furthermore, as a pastor and Seminary instructor, I can say that this author has a wonderful gift for presenting very difficult theological concepts in a carefully accessible manner. His presentation of the what it means to be in union with Christ, the manner in which God's love transforms an individual (regeneration) and that which theologians call "the covenant of redemption", the purpose and economy of the Triune God in accomplishing the Divine purpose in history, is quite impressive.
These things make this book very powerful and, with adequate precautions, very useful for lay instruction and illustration.
Then there is the dangerous side. First, and perhaps most important, is the significant imbalance of the portrait of God painted in it. Though never quite expressed, the book pretty much affirms universal salvation. Surprisingly, it is man who is in the judgment seat in this portrayal, God having already judged all men as guilty but also having forgiven them and reconciled them to Himself. The scriptural bounds on this position are not adequately expressed at all. In this book God is overly sentimental and simplified. There is no hint of God as He is presented in (say) the book of Judges. The God of the universe, Jesus His Son and the Holy Spirit are not very far removed from Seinfield and Friends in their mannerisms and interaction. Certainly some of this is acknowledged as God's condescension to man in appearing to him in such a way as to minister to him, but it is very over done.
Further there is the unscriptural and, in my opinion, quite wrong, portrayal of the Trinity. Though he strives to avoid this, the author skirts the edge of idolatry. There is a reason why God commanded that we are to make no graven images of His person. It is because all such images will not only fall short of accuracy but will in fact lead us astray. The portrayal of God the Father in the images in this book is a serious departure from this general rule and is quite prone to distortion. I do not believe that we are free to play with the metaphors God uses to describe Himself nor that we are free to downplay some of His attributes in preference to others. There is more than a little of this in this book.
Though the author strives for balance yet he falls short of presenting Jesus as pre-eminent in the life of man. Jesus is not central in his presentation though it is often stated that He is central in God's understanding. God the Father and the Holy Spirit are more so. Here again the metaphors work against the author. Both God the Father and the Holy Spirit are portrayed as warm, empathetic women who are naturally more easily empathetic. Jesus comes across as wonderful but a bit bumbling in his humanity and thus loved and loving but a bit less wonderful. This is a serious problem to me.
Next, evil in this book is entirely a result of man's choosing autonomy for himself and all misery in this world flows from that. Certainly, this is true in one sense but not in every sense. The person of Satan is entirely absent from this portrayal. So is any hint that God regards any one person, no matter what their spiritual state, any differently than others. Evil is presented as negation, the absence of good, rather than a positive force. There is truth in this but not the whole truth.
Lastly, this author falls seriously short in his understanding of the Church and the place of organized Christianity in the Kingdom of God. This regrettable tendency is rampant in our culture and is conducive to a very stilted Christianity, far short of that picture painted for us in Scriptures. God in this book comes perilously close to endorsing all religious feelings and sentiments, whether Christian or not, as pathways to Himself. I cannot comprehend how the author could allow this.
All in all, again, this book has much to commend it. The commendable things are self-evident in the reading and I have not commented on them as much because of that. The things which detract from the book are not so evident and hence, in my estimation, much more dangerous because of it. It must be read with caution.
Comments