# The Shack - Spiritual P*rnography?



## panta dokimazete (Nov 29, 2008)

I am sick to death of seeing the Shack lying around my friends and family's houses. Whenever I say something about it, I have been asked, have I read it, as if that is some measure of credibility.

I am starting to rebut this statement with, "I don't have to watch p0rnography to know that it is an abuse of the image of God (Imago Dei) - how much more should I turn from writings that create a non-Scriptural image of God Himself and thus violate the 2nd commandment? If it is not glorifying to God, it is evil. It is spiritual p0rnography."

It is amazing that people still try to defend this wretched piece of garbage.

Sorry, I am in rant mode, but c'mon!


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Nov 29, 2008)

I keep hearing about this book. What is the main thrust of the book? I have only heard bad things from people I respect, but great things from people who are spiritual infants.


----------



## LawrenceU (Nov 29, 2008)

I read it. Big waste time other than now I can talk about all the really bad stuff in it first hand. I don't have time to go into detail, but it is without merit of any sort. Unless, you just think heart tugs are all that God desires, regardless of how they come. It is the only out and out Blasphemy that I've read that has been so well received.


----------



## panta dokimazete (Nov 29, 2008)

links to a couple of Shack reviews and a video of Mark Driscoll


----------



## Matthias (Nov 29, 2008)

never heard of it


----------



## Hawaiian Puritan (Nov 29, 2008)

I have to admit I read it--in fact, I read the whole book in one sitting. It certainly would have an emotional tug on people who are looking for that kind of comfort (essentially, a saccharine explanation of "why does God let bad things happen to good people"), but in addition to a totally fanciful portrayal of the Trinity (putting it charitably) it expresses a form of salvation that borders on universalism.

What I can't understand is that the book has been endorsed by people you think would know better.


----------



## kvanlaan (Nov 29, 2008)

Panting Donkey Machete:

Listen to Al Mohler's review on his radio show. I was shocked and dismayed not only by what I heard but what other Christians are saying about it. It is worth the time to have a listen. I will look for the link a minute here.

-----Added 11/29/2008 at 08:07:55 EST-----

Here is the link I was looking for:

A Look at “The Shack”

-----Added 11/29/2008 at 08:08:58 EST-----



> never heard of it



Lucky man.


----------



## panta dokimazete (Nov 29, 2008)

Thanks, much for the link!

Panting Donkey Machete evokes to me the breath of cutting wit from Balaam's transport animal, a little known martial arts form, as well as a cool garage band name! 

-----Added 11/29/2008 at 08:22:29 EST-----

Listening now with my Dad, who read it.


----------



## LawrenceU (Nov 29, 2008)

> Listening now with my Dad, who read it./QUOTE]
> 
> This ought to be good.


----------



## Grymir (Nov 30, 2008)

Hi Panta! I hate to break the bubble, but sometimes you just have to breakdown and read what the people are saying. I read the Book of Mormon and was in like flint with the Mormons, even though they knew I wasn't one. I've read so much Barth I wanna puke. But it leaves the gainsayers speachless when they know you've read it.

I wanna open fire with my Bible bazooka everytime I hear "have you read it yet?". It's really a side-step so they don't have to deal with the real issues.

-----Added 11/30/2008 at 12:11:38 EST-----

P.s. The Shack is more like a spiritual Harlequin Romance Novel. ha ha


----------



## panta dokimazete (Nov 30, 2008)

LawrenceU said:


> > Listening now with my Dad, who read it.
> 
> 
> 
> This ought to be good.



It was ...enlightening...to say the least 

Good opportunity to discuss the meaning of narrative and meta-narrative


----------



## Thomas2007 (Nov 30, 2008)

Never heard of it either.


----------



## ReformedWretch (Nov 30, 2008)

The Shack is the new "Purpose Driven Life" except it's even worse than the PDL if you can believe that! The author is a Universalist.


----------



## MMasztal (Jan 9, 2009)

PuritanBouncer said:


> The Shack is the new "Purpose Driven Life" except it's even worse than the PDL if you can believe that! The author is a Universalist.



I got that impression too and add in a good dose of emergent thinking. I actually got a copy for a Christmas present from one of my student's parents and read it over the holiday break. It's really bad theologically.

A few of my H.S students are reading it now. I asked one girl, who I know to be pretty well grounded Scripturally, what she thought of the book. She gushed about how it depicted God as as "real person" and how "neat it was" for Him to interact with man. She asked me how I liked it and I told her I didn't...at all. I asked her if she liked the book whether because it portrayed God as she thought she would like him to be or because it was true to Scripture. Her "countenance" changed.

Her mother spoke with me today and I expressed my concerns. The parents are also reading it and have the same concerns I had and they would discuss it with the girl.


----------



## greenbaggins (Jan 9, 2009)

Just blogged about _The Shack_ here.


----------



## Kim G (Jan 9, 2009)

Grymir said:


> The Shack is more like a spiritual Harlequin Romance Novel. ha ha



Like he said--p*rnography. But for girls.

Hate that stuff.


----------



## JohnGill (Jan 9, 2009)

panta dokimazete said:


> I am sick to death of seeing the Shack lying around my friends and family's houses. Whenever I say something about it, I have been asked, have I read it, as if that is some measure of credibility.
> 
> I am starting to rebut this statement with, "I don't have to watch p0rnography to know that it is an abuse of the image of God (Imago Dei) - how much more should I turn from writings that create a non-Scriptural image of God Himself and thus violate the 2nd commandment? If it is not glorifying to God, it is evil. It is spiritual p0rnography."
> 
> ...



I've had the same reaction by the the pastor's wife of the church I attend. I was able to tell her that yes I read it and that it was I know it to be a vile and blasphemous book which perverts the image of God. Her response was that one of her sons had met the author and that he was nice. 

I will join you in 

Get use to this in modern Christendom. It's not about what the scripture teaches, but how God makes you feel.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jan 9, 2009)

Remind me again why we do not burn at the stake anymore?


----------



## toddpedlar (Jan 9, 2009)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> Remind me again why we do not burn at the stake anymore?



There aren't sufficient trees left?


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jan 9, 2009)

Maybe in Iowa 

We have plenty here in PA...


----------



## jwithnell (Jan 9, 2009)

I must lead a sheltered life -- I hadn't even heard of this until just this past week. On one hand, I can appreciate reading so you can discuss stuff intelligently, but lately, I haven't had much time to read _anything_, so I don't know if I want to take the time to read something that apparently refers to the Holy Spirit as a she.


----------



## Guido's Brother (Jan 9, 2009)

I keep hearing about people in my congregation reading it. It's not that they haven't been warned. I just try to remember that it's probably just another fad and in another year it will have gone the way of the Prayer of Jabez and other such theological dodo birds.


----------



## Zeno333 (Jan 9, 2009)

It is for sure better than the "Course in Miracles". that book and anything connected to it, is BAD NEWS. And yes, the "Course" may well be one of the most "evil" books ever written, is making inroads in certain "Christian" circles....To quote that old TV show "Lost in Space". "Danger. Danger".
I have not read the Shack, but it is probably another example of "New Age" thinking trying to get its foot in the "Christian door".


----------



## kvanlaan (Jan 9, 2009)

> I can't think of a single example where one side of a conflict was using total war against an opponent who wasn't that didn't win.



Germany, WWI.




> I keep hearing about people in my congregation reading it. It's not that they haven't been warned. I just try to remember that it's probably just another fad and in another year it will have gone the way of the Prayer of Jabez and other such theological dodo birds.



In a CanRC church??????? Time for some _*serious*_ _huisbezoek_.


----------



## JohnGill (Jan 9, 2009)

Zeno333 said:


> It is for sure better than the "Course in Miracles". that book and anything connected to it, is BAD NEWS. And yes, the "Course" may well be one of the most "evil" books ever written, is making inroads in certain "Christian" circles....To quote that old TV show "Lost in Space". "Danger. Danger".
> I have not read the Shack, but it is probably another example of "New Age" thinking trying to get its foot in the "Christian door".



I haven't heard of this nonsense in years. Almost forgot about it. Maybe we can mix Course, Shack, Dianetics, and modern "christianity" into a new religion. I smell a moneymaker here!!


----------



## Zeno333 (Jan 9, 2009)

JohnGill said:


> Zeno333 said:
> 
> 
> > It is for sure better than the "Course in Miracles". that book and anything connected to it, is BAD NEWS. And yes, the "Course" may well be one of the most "evil" books ever written, is making inroads in certain "Christian" circles....To quote that old TV show "Lost in Space". "Danger. Danger".
> ...



Yep the Course in Miracles is still out there..

Oprah Winfrey is a staunch reader and public supporter of the "Course". And yet she also publicly claims to be a "Christian".


----------



## Marrow Man (Jan 9, 2009)

JohnGill said:


> Maybe we can mix Course, Shack, Dianetics, and modern "christianity" into a new religion. I smell a moneymaker here!!



Interesting that you used the word "smell".


----------



## Guido's Brother (Jan 9, 2009)

kvanlaan said:


> > I keep hearing about people in my congregation reading it. It's not that they haven't been warned. I just try to remember that it's probably just another fad and in another year it will have gone the way of the Prayer of Jabez and other such theological dodo birds.
> 
> 
> 
> In a CanRC church??????? Time for some _*serious*_ _huisbezoek_.



It doesn't help that we have Regent College in our neck of the woods. Regent has been ardently marketing the book. It was Eugene Peterson who said that this book would do for our generation what Pilgrim Progress did in Bunyan's.


----------



## Rich Koster (Jan 9, 2009)

The Shack could be renamed the Outhouse... both contain unclean things.

-----Added 1/9/2009 at 09:54:33 EST-----



panta dokimazete said:


> links to a couple of Shack reviews and a video of Mark Driscoll



I listen to Driscoll in my car during the commute. Sometimes he rants (so do I) but he does his homework first. The 7:46 is worth the look.


----------



## DMcFadden (Jan 9, 2009)

Guido's Brother said:


> It doesn't help that we have Regent College in our neck of the woods. Regent has been ardently marketing the book. It was Eugene Peterson who said that this book would do for our generation what Pilgrim Progress did in Bunyan's.



        

You've got to be kidding? Peterson compared it to Pilgrim's Progress???

Hey, Bart Campolo endorsed it as well.


----------



## Rich Koster (Jan 9, 2009)

The only similarity is that they are printed books


----------



## Guido's Brother (Jan 9, 2009)

DMcFadden said:


> Guido's Brother said:
> 
> 
> > It doesn't help that we have Regent College in our neck of the woods. Regent has been ardently marketing the book. It was Eugene Peterson who said that this book would do for our generation what Pilgrim Progress did in Bunyan's.
> ...



I know, I know. You'll never be able to read the Message the same way ever again.


----------



## toddpedlar (Jan 9, 2009)

jwithnell said:


> I must lead a sheltered life -- I hadn't even heard of this until just this past week. On one hand, I can appreciate reading so you can discuss stuff intelligently, but lately, I haven't had much time to read _anything_, so I don't know if I want to take the time to read something that apparently refers to the Holy Spirit as a she.



The Father in The Shack is a black woman.


----------



## Zeno333 (Jan 9, 2009)

toddpedlar said:


> jwithnell said:
> 
> 
> > I must lead a sheltered life -- I hadn't even heard of this until just this past week. On one hand, I can appreciate reading so you can discuss stuff intelligently, but lately, I haven't had much time to read _anything_, so I don't know if I want to take the time to read something that apparently refers to the Holy Spirit as a she.
> ...



So is the Shack book claiming that a woman can be an "equal figure" to a father??


----------



## toddpedlar (Jan 9, 2009)

Zeno333 said:


> toddpedlar said:
> 
> 
> > jwithnell said:
> ...



I'm not sure what it's trying to claim, but it's wicked blasphemy at best.


----------



## kvanlaan (Jan 9, 2009)

> It doesn't help that we have Regent College in our neck of the woods. Regent has been ardently marketing the book. It was Eugene Peterson who said that this book would do for our generation what Pilgrim Progress did in Bunyan's.



Peterson's endorsement should be the largest of large red flags as to the book's content, even if you never actually open it. Also, things have changed, haven't they? I thought Regent was JI Packer's home, but I think I read somewhere that he's gone a bit wonky too, no?

Seriously though, if a visiting elder saw "The Shack" on someone's shelf during huisbezoek, would he not take the father to task? As I recall from my childhood, that's how it would go where I come from...


----------



## Pergamum (Jan 9, 2009)

kvanlaan said:


> Panting Donkey Machete:
> 
> Listen to Al Mohler's review on his radio show. I was shocked and dismayed not only by what I heard but what other Christians are saying about it. It is worth the time to have a listen. I will look for the link a minute here.
> 
> ...



Panting donkey machete!!!! HA!!!!! Where's a mod to change his signature when you need one?


----------



## PresbyDane (Jan 10, 2009)

I think the conclusion on his book is DO NOT read it ! it is


----------



## Rich Koster (Jan 10, 2009)

AGREED


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jan 10, 2009)

kvanlaan said:


> Panting Donkey Machete:
> 
> Listen to Al Mohler's review on his radio show. I was shocked and dismayed not only by what I heard but what other Christians are saying about it. It is worth the time to have a listen. I will look for the link a minute here.
> 
> ...



Highly recommend listening to Al Mohler's show. Excellent as usual.


----------



## Guido's Brother (Jan 10, 2009)

kvanlaan said:


> Seriously though, if a visiting elder saw "The Shack" on someone's shelf during huisbezoek, would he not take the father to task? As I recall from my childhood, that's how it would go where I come from...



It can be difficult to take someone to task with credibility if you haven't actually read the book. The elders can say, "The pastors warned the congregation about this book," but that only goes so far with some.


----------



## DMcFadden (Jan 10, 2009)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> kvanlaan said:
> 
> 
> > Panting Donkey Machete:
> ...



Mohler did a good job of highlighting SOME of the heresy. 

A collection of negative reactions by notables such as Mohler and Colson can be found at: 

Taking The Shack to the Shed | Out of Ur | Conversations for Ministry Leaders

Even the *USA Today* did a fine job of surfacing pros and cons (includes mention of the author's adultery 15 years ago that gave rise to his pulling demons out of his own "shack"). They cite Mohler and Driscoll:



> Albert Mohler, a leading theologian of the Southern Baptist Convention, which takes the Bible literally, trashes The Shack in his weekly radio show, calling it "deeply subversive," "scripturally incorrect" and downright "dangerous."
> 
> Says Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Church in Seattle: "If you haven't read The Shack, don't!"
> 
> Driscoll, whose multi-campus non-denominational church is packed with 6,000 people each weekend in the least-churched corner of the nation, says he is "horrified" by Young's book. He says "it misrepresents God. Young misses the big E on the eye chart."



'Shack' opens doors, but critics call book 'scripturally incorrect' - USATODAY.com

A "balanced" assessment by an apologetics speaker who criticizes the errors in the book, but gives a strongly positive assessment, can be found by the Probe folks:

Response to 'The Shack' - Probe Ministries

Probe sees the positives insights as:



> • God is warm and inviting
> • He collects our tears in a bottle
> • Jesus was not particularly handsome
> • God is one, in three Persons
> ...


They fault the central error as denial of authority and hierarchy within the Trinity, and the suggestion that hierarchy is a result of the Fall, not of the created order.

If you want a defense of The Shack by someone who knows the author, cf, the defense on the publisher's website, addressing the specific issues of the Trinity, universalism, Scripture, etc., 

Is The Shack Heresy

*On balance, I suspect that the book has more value than I had prejudged it to have. However, with diamonds abounding just below the surface of so many solid Reformation, post-Reformation, Puritan, and even contemporary books, why scubba dive in a sewer for the promise of a possible cubic zirconia? I do NOT intend to read the book.*


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jan 10, 2009)

Love the little blurb in the USA Today you cited Dennis:



> Albert Mohler, a leading theologian of the Southern Baptist Convention, _*which takes the Bible literally*_...



How ignorant.


----------

