“The Shack” is “The Message” outhouse.
“The Shack” is not about a basketball player it is a book that twists the Gospel. If you are buying into the message of this book thought up in an outhouse you are buying into damnable heresy. The endorsement on the cover of this heretical book is from Eugene Peterson, author of “The Message”. “This book has the potential to do for our generation what John Bunyan’s ‘Pilgrim’s Progress’ did for his. It’s that good!” Eugene Peterson, author of The Message (Front cover endorsement)
I for one am fed up with those who quote “The Message” as if it were the Bible. It is not. It is nothing but a very bad paraphrase. Stop quoting “The Message” on your media programs or I will turn you off for good. Stop quoting “The Message” from your pulpits or I will walk out of your church. Stop reading from “The Message” in your Bible studies or I will not attend. Why? Because Eugene Peterson popular paraphrase of the Bible is twisted. He has no biblical discernment, his bad paraphrase of the world of God is not the word of God no matter how popular it has become. If you cannot use a literal version of the Bible to get across your teachings perhaps you should not be teaching at all. Now Eugene Peterson is endorsing even more twisted writings for your deception.
Having said that, those with ears to hear really do need to know what is wrong with “The Shack” by William P. Young that is now widely accepted in postmodern churches. Read the article about this book I have a few quotes from it below.
Deceived by a counterfeit “Jesus”: The twisted “truths” of The Shack & A Course in Miracles – CWN
“Those who love me come from every system that exists. They were Buddhists or
Mormons, Baptists or Muslims…. I have no desire to make them Christian, but I do want to join them in their transformation into sons and daughters of my Papa, into my brothers and sisters.”
–The Shack’s “Jesus.” [1,p.182]
The Shack calls for a similar denial of reality. Yet countless pastors and church leaders are delighting in its message. By ignoring (or redefining) sin and guilt, they embrace an inclusive but counterfeit “Christianity” that draws crowds but distorts the Bible. Discounting Satan as well, they weaken God’s warnings about deception. No wonder His armor for today’s spiritual war became an early victim of this spreading assault on Truth. Roger Oakland, author of Faith Undone, hinted at this transformation in his article “My Trip to the Rethink Conference:”
“For nearly two thousand years, most professing Christians have seen the Bible as the foundation for the Christian faith. The overall view at the Rethink Conference, however, is that Christianity, as we have known it, has run its course and must be replaced…. Speakers insisted that Christianity must be re-thought and re-invented if the name of Jesus Christ is going to survive here on planet earth.”[3]
No room for the historical Jesus?
Must we reimagine God to make Him fit the rising universal church?
That seems to be the aim of The Shack’s female “God.” Here she is speaking to the main character, Mackenzie (Mack for short):
“For me to appear to you as a woman and suggest that you call me Papa is simply to mix metaphors, to help you keep from falling so easily back into your religious conditioning.”[1,p.93]
Also read what Dave Hunt has to say about “The Shack”
Then read Dr. Norman L. Geisler and Bill Roach Critical review of The Shack.
Here is another review of The Shack given, by Eric Barger.
Date posted: Wednesday, February 27th, 2008 3:25 pm | Under category: Apostasy, Emerging/Emergent Church, Post Modern, aberrant/heretical teaching, discernment
RSS 2.0 | Comment | Trackback
I’ve had it!! Bullshack is what I call this! I mean, seriously, what does this book have to offer to anyone? “My Papa”! It’s pathetic! What foolishness for mankind to think God resides within them, indeed that they “are” God. Look around, people, how can you be so naive? Man is sinful and incapable of living a pure life. Were it not for the fact that we have a loving and merciful Father in heaven who gave His only begotten Son to die for the sins of the world, we would all be condemned to hell. God wasn’t interested in the sacrifices the Israelites brought them! He wanted them to obey His commands out of love and fear for the God that had lead them out of Egypt to the holy land and that’s what He’s asking from us as well. God doesn’t owe us anything! Still He has mercy on all those who earnestly seek Him and follow His ways. So what’s so wrong with this message of repentance?? In return you are forgiven and granted eternal life; it’s a win-win situation! These imposters are just perverting everything for their own worldly gain. I don’t belief in religion that says you can reach heaven, moksha, nirvana or whatever all by your own efforts. Man simply is not capable. Moreover, there is but one almighty and allknowing God. And the only way for us to “reconcile” is by repenting of our sins and accepting the Son of God as our Savior. All this mystical mumbo jumbo nonsense is leading nobody to repent and to be born again. On the contrary, in their delusion they’re opening themselves up to demonic influence, but NOT the Holy Spirit you receive upon acceptance of Christ! But oops, I forgot, no such thing as demons and devils eh? Oh and sure, there’s no such thing as evil and sin either! I guess that explains why people are so revengeful, uncontrolled, deceitful, unloving, self-centered and dishonest! And I would have to include myself among these sinful people, by the way. That is why I became a Christian in the first place, because I am a SINNER. I’m unworthy to be called a child of God yet I am deemed worthy of grace by Christ. And who is the child of God? The one who admits his error and humbles himself before God, is it not?
In Biblical terms I’d say woe unto them for leading others astray with their false universalist teaching! Your Papa surely is not the God of Israel!
Emergent bullshack fit for the outhouse.
Wow.. so did you actually read the book? Because your references seem pretty out of context. The first line you quoted regarding “I have no desire to make them Christian” really bothered me at first too. But then I reread the page and realized that the author is speaking in terms of Corporate Christianity that has been overrun by rules and judgment.
Regarding the quote “For nearly two thousand years, most professing Christians have seen the Bible as the foundation for the Christian faith. The overall view at the Rethink Conference, however, is that Christianity, as we have known it, has run its course and must be replaced.” – If Christianity is about a relationship with the Creator of our constantly-changing world, does it not make sense that we diverse the way we communicate and reach people in order to show God’s relevance to their lives? The church, the actual building and business that it has become, was not created by God. The books of Acts shows The Church, the body and bride of Christ, as a living, breathing, growing group of people who lived together in love and faith, helping those who needed it and adding to their numbers in incredible ways. That part doesn’t need changing. But the way we as a church reach people? You can’t be afraid of change. If Christianity never evolved in our changing world, we’d still be stuck in the Crusades! Not to mention we’d all be Catholic. Don’t put God in a box! Reforming the way we reach people doesn’t mean we are changing the truth of the Bible or the character of God and the roles of Jesus and the Holy spirit. God can do incredible things on top of the things he has already done and is already doing. My dad, someone who has really struggled with the concept of God since I was born, is actually willing to read the Shack. Why? Because it does something that churches and many religious scholars have a hard time doing. It shows God in an incredibly real and relevant way. The book is about something more than what’s on the surface. We know God isn’t truly the characters of Papa, Sarayu, and the exact version of Jesus this book describes. But we are given a glimpse into the very nature of God’s unconditional love, mercy, comfort, and his willingness to meet us right where we are, in the middle of the mess we’ve made, and to take us into His arms and rescue us. The God I serve is WAY more interested in building relationships with His children than watching His servants fight over legalities.
Whitney,
Why do you quote the lies in the Shack and heretical rethinking conferences to claim that the teaching in the Shack is valid? True Christianity can not change it is founded on unchangeable truths. The foundations have been laid and they are given in the New Testament.
You do not tell people the truth about Jesus by compromising the gospel so that it is a different gospel than the one given through which all mankind MUST be saved. The Shack and these rethinking conferences of the Emergent Church are distorting the gospel. Paul himself said if anyone gives another gospel than the one he presented let them be damned. He said it twice in a row to convey the importance of keeping the gospel pure. He said that because he was given the gospel of salvation by direct Revelation from God. I will say it again. If anyone gives you any other gospel than the one given in the New Testament scriptures, let them be damned. They certainly will be.
There is a difference between presenting the gospel in a way to reach diverse societies and in making it a false gospel with a different Jesus and a way to God that saves no one.
I do not wish anyone to read the Shack especally your dad because it will not lead him to Christ is will move him to believe in false religion and false security. This book is doing more harm to true Christianity than any book I can think of because it is subtlety deceptive, but that is how Satan works. Just put a little poison in with some truth and watch the gullible humans who never accepted the truth suck it up.
Your dad and many others that read that book will now accept lies that make Christianity compatible with New Age and Eastern teachings. It is not. Christianity is 180 degrees opposed to all other religion. Your Dad will now become completely unreachable and hostile toward true Christianity. I know because those who read the book email me and they are hostile to the foundational truths of Christianity. They now think they are enlightened because they read the Shack. Now their eyes are opened toward pluralist Universalism where God will save everyone because He is so in love with all us wonderful human beings. They are also hostile toward historical Christianity because like in the book they confuse psuedo Christianity with true Christianity and blame Christians for the sins of institutional Christian play actors.
God is only willing to take you in His arms if you live in His Son through a spiritual rebirth otherwise you are still dead in your stinking sins to Him. God is interested in saving those He called to be saved. He could care less about building relationships with walking dead people. Making God to be like a human is idolatry and Blasphemy.
Here is a short but very good book review of the Shack. Any true Christian should be able to see the poison in the book and should be telling everyone they really care about to stay away from it. It is extremely deadly to those who are Christian in name only and those who already wish to reject the narrow way through the blood of Jesus. Those who are enlightened by the darkness in this book will be led toward pluralist Universalism not Christ. They will then attend the Church of Oprah and recite “The Secret” as there gospel. You have been told.
http://www.svchapel.org/Resources/BookReviews/book_reviews.asp?ID=387
someone gave me this book for Christmas,telling me it was the best book they ever read,blah,blah—i started to read this —–what a load of junk! At first i thought it was me since it was compared to “Pilgrims Progress”–but the more i read the more confusion i felt and i wasn’t at peace about what i was taking in –so i started checking it out withsome people i consider to be reputable–so glad to know i wasn’t losing the ability to understand what i was reading—it just didn’t feel right
You would think Christians would have some biblical discernment like you and sense that the book is not right. But, apparently they do not. Like programed computer viruses they just pass on the infection to everyone on their contact list. These days Christians really need to pass all “Christian” books through a virus checker.
Just to show how corrupt “The Message” translation is … just take a look at JOHN 3:16, in comparison with the KJV:
THE KJV
“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”
THE MESSAGE
“This is how much God loved the world: He gave his Son, his one and only Son. And this is why: so that no one need be destroyed; by believing in him, anyone can have a whole and lasting life.”
Note how Jesus was speaking to Nicodemus on the need to become born-again, and it’s obvious JOHN 3:16 speaks of ETERNAL LIFE. But THE MESSAGE distorts the intent and makes it appear as if Jesus is simply referring to a better type of worldly life.
One of many passages in the Message that miss the real message. Those who quote from The Message as if it is the word of God are not doing the Church any service. I will walk out of a church or a study that promotes the use of that postmodern paraphrase.
One of the problems of our modern secular world is the massive intrusion or the storyteller. We have been conditioned to allow ourselves to enjoy the parts of a story we like or believe and to suspend our disbelief regarding anything we don’t seriously consider truth. This is what happened to me as I read The Shack. It was billed as a true story and i read it as such. I kept telling myself “This could happen.” But I started reading lies well told. At first i suspended disbelief. Pretty soon I realized I’d been had. At that point I had to keep reminding myself that this is just a clever novel. In the end I find that I’ve been duped by my own willingness to submit Godly wisdom and discipline to my enjoyment of the American storytelling culture; namely movies. Sorry, Lord.
“True Christianity can not change it is founded on unchangeable truths. The foundations have been laid and they are given in the New Testament.”
While i believe that what you say here is absolutely true, I think what Whitney was saying is that while the content of the Gospel does not ever change, the method in which we deliver it can and must change and evolve in order to relate to the culture in which it exists. Consider sharing the truth of the Gospel with a group of indigenous people…you must rework the timeless truths into a format that can relate to the audience.
Even Paul said that he has become all things to all people in order to save people (1 Cor 9:19-23). Or take the Gospels, Luke wrote to a Gentile audience while Matthew likely wrote to a Jewish audience. The content remains the same, while the method f delivery remains fluid. Young is just taking the timeless truths of the perfect love which exists in the trinity and shows it to the audience in a way that they can connect with.
Also, it might be wise to remember that it is not a theological or apologetical textbook. It is a fictional story which is drawn from theological truths, much like the Left Behind series or many other books that you’d find in your local Christian bookstore.
Changing delivery to reach a postmodern generation does not include inserting heresy. Paul did not become a heretic in order to give the gospel.
Christians that write Christian fiction about the nature of the Father Son and Holy Spirit ought to have Orthodox Theology.
I think Dr. Norman Geisler points out the problems with The Shack better than anyone so I will let him point out the problems in The Shack. I also include his conclusion.
For the complete explanation of each of the problems that Dr Geisler points out about The Shack read the following article.
http://www.normangeisler.net/theshack.html
I can definitely agree with you about some theological problems with this book, and that is why i don’t think that you can use this as a textbook. God often chooses to reveal himself to people through conversations and relationships, and I know from having read this book with people; some have been more willing to enter into a dialogue with me about who God is. Here is where I believe that the book shines, in that people who are opposed to the wrathful God that they grew up hearing about in Sunday school get to see that God is love (1 John) and that he enters into our pain to bring healing.
Don’t hear me wrong, I do believe that God is holy, and that his wrath must be satisfied; but don’t recall ever having met a single person who is attracted by that view of God. Perhaps this will justify you calling me a heretic, but It is the love and mercy of God that draws people to repentance, not the fire and brimstone.
So is it possible God is using this book to express his love to people who have been hurt by the Church’s repeated attempts to convert them by force?
And to read this within the context of a conversation can allow believers to correct some of the theological points that are misleading. I have found that to be valuable, because yes, there are people who read this without having a grounded theological framework to process the book, and it can be precarious, but were there perhaps people who said the same things about “The Chronicles of Narnia?” I mean, we don’t want people thinking that Jesus is a Lion do we? Because according to 1 Peter 5, I thought the devil is the Lion…
Oh how confused I am…
You simply are not getting it, the book is heretical for the reasons pointed out by Dr. Geisler. There are plenty of sound Christian books to recommend to people where people can get the correct view of God. We do not need to recommend books that are really a different gospel to try to win over a postmodern generation because they have chosen to reject the absolute truths about God taught in the Bible. You cannot spin the truth about God and Christ and make true converts to Christ. What would Paul really say about preaching a different gospel then the one given?
So what are the “sound Christian books” that would capture the attention of someone who has felt attacked by the church, by God, who has felt the stinging pain of betrayal, of guilt, and the pain that Mack deals with?
And again, what I was saying is that this book can be a really good addition to conversations that are happening between a believer and another person. the conversations are more important than the book itself, but the book can breach the walls and opposition that people have built up due to hurts and pain that have built up over the years. I would not think that the book by itself is sufficient, because there are potential issues, but why not have it be a complimentary resource?
Unless of course you have other suggestions that are better? And thinking in terms of someone who might be hostile to the Gospel, because while JI Packer or Dallas Willard, or Lee Strobel or others might be solid theologically, I don’t see them really connecting with your average 20-30ish adult in the ways that The Shack can.
You might start with the Bible and the Christian classics like Pilgrims Progress.
I really am not buying your argument that all these postmodern people feel that they are being attacked by the church, by God etc. I think it is a false argument used to justify promoting a heretical book. How and where are Christians attacking postmoderns in our churches? If anything the church is compromising the gospel and their own worship services to appease them.
Postmoderns are not coming to church or God because nobody is getting through to them that they are lost sinners that must repent of their sins and be saved by the blood sacrifice of Jesus Christ. The Shack certainly is not teaching that.
Postmoderns want to believe that they can define their own truth and the The Shack appeals because it also does the same..
Postmoderns reject the absolute truths of the Bible and that is why they cannot be reached with the truth. No amount of watering down the gospel to get to their level of relativism is going to get them to accept what is required of them for their salvation.
Telling them lies about the nature of God might appeal to postmoderns looking for a form of Universalism or religious pluralism but it does not put them on the path to salvation.
The Shack may connect with biblical illiterates but it is a very subtle deceptive connection.
There’s a good book you might want to read to get a view of how people today see the church. It’s a book called UnChristian, by David Kinnaman and Gabe Lyons. It’s backed by the Barna Institute, which is known for having a fairly accurate view of our culture. I’d suggest reading that to get a better view of what people today think of the Church, and then by logical progression, how they view the God of said Church.
But then again, perhaps you think that Barna is leading people to Hell in a handbasket as well?
I have no false illusions about how people today view the Church. How would you expect unsaved people and people who reject God’s truth to view the Church? The true Church of God was never popular in the world and the day it becomes popular (before the return of Christ) it will no longer be the Church
You are also confusing the Church with the institutional churches like Catholicism and liberal Protestantism. If people see through all the phoniness in these that is good. Then they may be opened to hearing the true gospel. There is no one harder to reach with the true gospel than people bound in false religion.
The main purpose of the Church is to teach the gospel of salvation by grace through faith to the whole world. It is high time that “Christian” authors got with God’s program instead of trying to adapt to please the world with their own ear tickling false doctrines.