I’ve heard the controversy on both sides. Some love it. Some hate it. Some declare it an abomination and act of heresy.
Many people have read The Shack by William P. Young. It still remains on the top sellers list on Amazon and Walmart.com. Some people told me I had to read it because it was life-changing. Others told me I needed to read it to be aware of the heretical teaching that was being read across the world. So, I read it.
Here are my thoughts on The Shack. Let me reiterate that these are my thoughts. You may not agree with me, and I’m okay with that. I’ll try not to include too many spoilers. Nevertheless, here are my thoughts:
- I came across a problem immediately in the Foreword. Although the book is a work of fiction, the Foreword sets up the story as though it already happened. For those who do not approach the book as a work of fiction, the Foreward could be very problematic.
- The role of “God the Father” is portrayed by a “large beaming African-American woman.” Some have argued that this isn’t a problem. God was merely appearing to Mac in the way that Mac needed to see Him. However, I have problems with this. Whenever we try to “humanize” God, we run into problems. When we humanize God as a “large beaming African-American woman” we really run into problems. No, I do not believe God is a gray-haired white man who rules the universe. But I do believe portraying God as a woman/mother is not in line with Scripture. Young also attributes “ebonics” to God (“We is all that you get“) which really seems to take away from the idea of our God being fully of wisdom and knowledge.
- Another issue that I had was when the spoke of the deity of Jesus. “God” tells Mac “Jesus is fully human. Although he is also fully God, he has never drawn upon his nature as God to do anything.” Mack then asks about miracles and “God” responds “He did so as a dependent, limited human being trusting in my life and power to be at work within him and through him. Jesus, as a human being, had no power within himself to heal anyone.” There are certainly statements there I might agree with, but Young seems to jumble some things together and make implications about Jesus that are not so clear in Scripture.
- I really had a problem with the book’s low view of sin. In one dialogue, “God” told Mack “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.” I’m very aware that “God” does not desire for anyone to perish and “God” calls all people to repentance. However, the Bible is very clear that “God” punishes sin, and because “God” is holy and just, He must punish people for sin. Even though God does not desire for people to die and go to hell, “God” is glorified through judgment because He is just.
- Continuing on the book’s low view of sin, one scenario bothered me more than any other in the book. During a conversation with “God” (aka Papa), Mack asks “God” how He can love such a screw-up. Here is “God’s” response: “I don’t wonder what you will do or what choices you will make. I already know. Let’s say, for example, I am trying to teach you how not to hide inside of lies…And let’s say that I know it will take you forty-seven situations and events before you will actually hear me–that is, before you will hear clearly enough to agree with me and change. So when you don’t hear me the first time, I’m not frustrated or disappointed, I’m thrilled. Only forty-six more times to go.” Is that a problematic? Yes! Basically, Young writes that God is not disappointed by disobedience or sin. Rather, God is “thrilled” because that sin means we’re closer to figuring it out. That’s not what the Bible teaches at all. Look at the example of the Children of Israel in the Old Testament. Was God thrilled with their sin and disobedience? Absolutely not! He poured out his judgment and wrath on them, and yet desperately called for their repentance. Nowhere in the Bible do I see God being “thrilled” with our sin. It’s our sin that caused Him to send Jesus to die. To say God is not disappointed or frustrated by our sin is taking a liberty no author has the power to say. To say he’s thrilled with our disobedience…that just might be a heretical idea.
- Another point concerning a low view of sin developed with a discussion on disappointment. During a conversation, “God” tells Mack He has no expectations for him. “God” says “Honey, I’ve never placed an expectation on you or anyone else…And beyond that, because I have no expectations, you never disappoint me.” Once again, the aspect of sin seems almost non-existent, or maybe entirely non-existent. This goes back to the previous point. Young’s take seems to be that God is never disappointed with our sin. I never see that idea in Scripture.
- An issue came up concerning submission. Here is an excerpt concerning the Trinity: “…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. Hierarchy would make no sense among us. Actually, this is your problem, not ours.” Some may find this trouble; some may not. I’m not quite sure how to interpret the author’s intent here. We know that Jesus submitted to the Father; we also know that the three parts of the Godhead work together.
- Young includes a comment that makes it very unclear what he believers about true believers. While speaking to Mack, Jesus said to him “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 institutions.” Later, Mack asks if all roads lead to Jesus and Jesus tells him no, but the statement really leaves the door open. Does he mean that people have been involved in false religions and turned from them and to Christ? Or does he mean people who are Buddhists, Mormons, Muslims, etc can have a relationship with Jesus? Young opens the door wide…and fails to explain what he means.
- Later on in the book, “God the Father” changes from the large black woman to a wiry gray-haired man. The point that is made is that Mack needed to see God in a certain way to be able to love God. I’ll refrain from saying more because of spoilers. However, I will note that although it may not be Young’s intention, the changing of the character of God almost makes it seem like God changes to fit our needs, and God becomes different things for different people; He is what we want Him to be. We know from Scripture that God never changes. He is the same today, yesterday, and forever.
- The ending of the book bothered me in the same regard as the Foreward. The “After Words” once again make the book out to be a true story. On the final pages of the book, they even mention “The Missy Project,” which to the naked eye seems like a foundation set up for a real life tragedy (Once you read into it, you see how misleading the name is).
- I will say that the book does have some positive qualities. It seems to deal with the situation of losing a loved one in a very real and helpful manner. I can easily see why people who have experienced great hurt in their lives have found this book to be comforting. The book also does a great job of dealing with forgiveness. It presents a very real situation and shows the main character’s struggle to forgive. As an Arminian, I was happy to see the book’s stance on free will, even though Young seemed to contradict himself many times.
- Overall, I had quite a few problems with the book. The book seemed to try to capture the audience emotionally. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, but when emotions are exploited, people will believe anything! Thus, Young takes great strides in bringing his audience in, and feeding information that may be true, partly true, possibly true, or far from the truth. The book took too many liberties with its information and also made too many implications about Jesus, God, the Trinity, and life. While there were many positive aspects to the book, I did find things in it that I believe could very well be considered heresy.
- I struggle to think what would happen if a new/young believer read this book. Although I do not believe it would lead a person away from Christianity, I do think it could instill values in a person’s life that are not biblical. The book seems to overlook the aspects of sin and God’s judgment. Love is preached throughout the entire book, yet the reality of judgment and wrath are nowhere to be found.
- From an editor’s standpoint, I found the story to be a poor work of fiction. I found many grammatical mistakes in the book that made me wonder if it had been edited by more than one person before going to print. Like I mentioned earlier, the story is emotionally gripping, but that does not make it a great story. It actually reminded me of a stereotypical Lifetimes movie. The story is bad, the dialogue is bad, the writing is bad, but the movie can have you in tears. (There’s a reason those things go straight to cable TV).
Would I suggest this book to others? Not a chance. I won’t come down as hard as others and say the book should be burned and thrown off shelves, but I would warn believers about reading it, especially believers who are weak in their faith. Sadly, many people read books like The Shack and believe every single word, and yet fail to open their Bibles and explore what God’s truth is really about.
But like I said…this is just my opinion.
