My wife heard “everyone” talking about The Shack
She normally reads at a leisurely pace, but she devoured this one overnight, then handed it off to me. She commented that it had a lot of Unitarian ideas in it. Actually, it turns out not to be uniquely Unitarian (the relational theology expressed could appeal to a wide range of mainstream and liberal Christian beliefs… and it is definitely written from a Trinitarian perspective), but it does have a strong Universalist bent to it. But, I’m getting ahead of myself.
First and foremost, it seems this book is an approach to theodicy – an attempt to resolve the existence of evil with the existence of a perfect and benevolent God. The author adopts two common approaches to this – the Free Will defense, in combination with the “Job” non-defense from the Bible, i.e. the “you can’t understand this defense” defense. The Free Will defense is handled in pretty much the standard fashion. The Job defense… well the Job defense sounds much better coming from the mouth of God than if you remember that The Shack was written by William P. Young. Coming from a fellow mere mortal, it rings kind of hollow. I will accept “I have reasons you wouldn’t understand” from God Almighty before I will accept “God is like I say he is and it makes sense for reasons you wouldn’t understand” from some joker who says he’s got an inside line.
And I suppose that is why this book is crafted as one very literal Deus ex Machina. It’s a risky maneuver, bringing God on stage, and no less for the non-traditional representation of same. An effort is made to make the Trinity make sense. There was an effort to make a Trinity of personal God(s) make sense.
There was no effort to make traditional notions of damnation make sense. I said that the book has a Universalist slant. It’s fair to say that the author unequivocally espouses Universalism. And that is where he gets in trouble with the establishment big boys… like Michael Youssef, who has preached a sermon decrying the book, and compiled a handy compendium of the thirteen heresies he finds in it.
Worth mentioning as an aside: “heresies” had no negative connotation before Irenaeus wrote against them in the second century. Originally it was a Greek word for faction or sect, and in Acts, Paul is depicted as confessing before Felix to the preaching of ‘that which is called heresy.’ It would also be worth examining Youssef’s arguments against the book, which are often pretty thin gruel, but that will have to be a project for another day. Ronnie Floyd pans the book as well, with spoilers, and links to others who take a dim view of The Shack’s theology.
My own thoughts are pretty brief. It wasn’t the type of book that I had problems putting down, but there was always enough there that I looked forward to picking it back up. Mack makes a very sympathetic central character. Unfortunately, the story was ultimately too contrived to allow me to buy in completely. I was able to suspend disbelief and enjoy the story and the morals behind it – but only just.
Compliments to the author on putting forward the importance of relationship, even if his visions of healthy relationships may be a tad simple.
Compliments to the author for avoiding the trap of “God lets bad things happen to bring us closer to Him,” which would have been most distasteful in context of this plot-line (as it is in context of real life). Instead, God manages to make the Unavoidable Evil in life come around to work for the good. So, it does bring people around, but that was not the reason behind it – it is not portrayed as a cosmic hostage situation. Thankfully.
The author makes some glancing swipes at certain (fundamentalist) viewpoints about the Bible, but lacks the resolve to state clearly what he thinks is the correct approach to the Bible. In most areas of contention, he leaves himself more wiggle room than his detractors are willing to give him credit for – and too much to give the reader a satisfying sense of having tangled with the issues.
That’s about it. I’ll close by recommending to anyone who wants a little light reading and would like a closer look at Christian Universalism.
I read this one quite a while back at the urging of a dear Southern Baptist friend of mine. She told me that it held some very profound ideas. After I read it I realized what she was talking about. It does have ideas and concepts in it that you are not going to find in your average Southern Baptist worship service.
I got a kick out of Michael Youssef and the thirteen heresies. He was big on the necessity of “justice”. I have never understood how anybody with one brain cell could equate eternal torment with the idea of justice.
My wife had the same reaction to the book that your wife had. She read it in one night and started buying copies for other folks to read.
It is funny how different people react to different things. I enjoyed the book but I was not blown away by it.
Different strokes for different folks I guess.