|
About Jesus Steve Sweetman The
Shack In
General In
general, I would not recommend anyone reading this book, mainly because
it gives a lopsided new of whom God is. Chapter
6 I begin with chapter 6 because that is where the
theological issues of the book begins.
The author begins in chapter 6 with a quote
suggesting that we view God, not as the all-powerful supreme
one of the universe, but as one who loves us and has come into humanity
because of this love. Well,
the loving aspect of God is certainly true, but the first revelation of
God in Scripture is not of love, but of the all-powerful creator Elohim.
From the Genesis 1 revelation of God, the Genesis account
continues to unfold. We
learn more about Yahweh, the
great "I AM" – the God of the covenant.
Genesis portrays a progressive revelation of who God is.
I question the quote that begins chapter 6.
In my thinking, western Christians should see God more in the
light the quote suggests we shouldn't see Him.
We really don't fear the all-powerful God as we should, and as
the Bible says we should. That's
one of our biggest problems. I don't like the idea of God appearing as a woman,
although I understand that the God of the Shack is meant to disassemble
Mack's, and also our, humanized view of Him.
I agree that most humans view God in an unbiblical sense, and
that includes the authors portrayal of God in The Shack.
In short, the author wants to stop thinking of God in human
terms, but he does the same himself.
The authors view of God is unbiblical.
It's his own view.
The author does a pretty good job in chapter 6 of
describing the orthodox view of the trinity, although, I'm not
100 % convinced that God can be defined in the simple theological
statement we call trinity. He
does appear in Scripture as being triune in nature, but somehow I think
it might be a bit more complicated than our somewhat simplistic
explanation. Don't get me
wrong, "I do believe in the trinity".
The author's point about God not forsaking Jesus on
the cross is good. We need
to understand that the Father turned His back on Jesus, that is, did not
rescue Him from the cross. The
Father did not, or could not, leave Jesus, or else at that point, Jesus
failed to be God, and that's possible. In
the long run, Jesus did get rescued, that is, after His work on the
cross was finished. The author of the book wanted God to appear to Mack
in order to have him understand better that He is his poppa, or father.
If that is really the case, then there is no logic in God
appearing as a woman. It
only confuses the issue, although I know why God came to Mack as a
woman, and that is so Mack's humanized view of God would be dismantled.
Still, if God wants us to understand Him as our father, becoming
a woman fails all logic. I'm not even sure I like the term "poppa".
I know about "Abba father" in Romans 8, and I know how
charismatics have interpreted that.
Yet Hebrews says that our God is a consuming fire.
There is a dichotomy here
that I have written about. See
my article at http://stevesweetman.com/articles010/papagod.htm
The author says that God appears in Scripture as a
man because He, or they, knew men needed a father more than a mother,
because of Adam's sin. Well,
we don't know that. The
Bible doesn't say why God speaks in terms of Himself as being a male,
and a father. The author is
speculating. Some, mostly
liberals, would suggest that God being male and a father is purely
cultural. Men were more
important than women, so the Bible speaks in terms of God being male.
As aside, I also don't like the new neutral
gender Bibles. The author says that God is both male and female.
I've heard that before, and have leaned in that direction, but as
I listened to my wife Dianne reading the Shack to me, I'm not convinced
of that as much as I was. God
may not be male and female. He
may be neither. He might be
God, something totally different from humans.
Male and femaleness might well be a product of God's imagination
in creation. I know we were
made in His likeness and image, which means from the Hebrew text, that
we were created similar to Him and a mere shadow of Him.
Still, that is not conclusive evidence that God is both male and
female. Chapter
7 The author does a good job when he speaks of the
reality of the Holy Spirit. Chapter
8 I don't like chapter 8. The author de-emphasizes the justice and wrath of
God. The book of Revelation
clearly states that God will pour out His wrath on the unrighteous.
God is more than a God of love. Love
without justice is a worldly way of thinking these days.
This chapter should be loved by the new age guys. The author is constantly putting His own human
thinking into the mind of papa God in the book, something he tells us we
shouldn't do. This is
fiction, and I'd suggest that some of the things God says in this book
is pure fiction. I weigh
everything with my understanding of what the Bible says. The author speaks of
"the circle of unity" in the Godhead.
There is no one in submission to another.
I wonder about that. Jesus
was clearly in submission to His Father when He was on earth. Acts 2:36
states that God has made Jesus both Lord and Christ. Lord
suggests power and a chain of command, at least over creation.
Jesus will return to earth and He will rule over the earth, and
we will rule with Him. That
clearly suggests a chain of command, at least over man, that the God of
the Shack says seems to suggest is a humanistic way of viewing God.
The book suggests that in God's mind unity without authority is
His way. That doesn't seem
to be what is presented in the book of Revelation, when it comes to the
new earth. In 1 Cor.
15:28 Paul says that a time will come when after Jesus has put death
under His feet, then He will subject everything to His Father, including
He Himself. That
sounds a bit like a chain of authority, or at least differing rolls in
the Godhead. Many
people fail to understand this verse. The God of the Shack says that Mack does not
understand God, does not trust God because he does not understand the
love of God. That's only
half true. Look at Abraham.
In Genesis 22:12 God said that He now knew that Abraham
"feared" Him because he obeyed God.
Real trust for Abraham was a product of his fear of God.
Abimelech, in Genesis 21 obeyed God because he feared him.
The author is missing a very real point here of the fear of the
Lord in his book, something the book of Proverbs says in very important.
Chapter
9 I found this chapter, about creation, tree of good
and evil … kind of boring
and a bit too philosophical. I understand what the author is attempting to do.
He is trying to simplify some complex Biblical truths a fiction
to help us understand better. I
just think that there could be a better way of doing this.
He loses people right away by making God a woman and calling her
papa. It is hard to explain
truth with fiction, and sometimes I think he complicates the issues more
than simplifying them.
Chapter
10 Okay, now people will think I'm being too critical
and judgment6al, and that's something we're not supposed to I still think the author is over the heads of the
non-Christian. I still think
he's being too philosophical. The thing that seems to be bothering me the most is
that the author is acting as if he knows how God thinks, knows the mind
of God in all these things. How
the author or I thinks is really relevant.
What the Bible says is the relevant thing. There's way too much
humanism in the author's thinking. That's
dangerous. Once again,
it's hard putting truth into a fictional story as the author is doing.
This chapter is about walking on the water, marriage
relationships… I'm not
even convinced I see things the same way the author does in this
chapter. He is equating his
own thoughts as God's thoughts. I
wouldn't do that. What I'd
do or say is, "this is the way I think, or believe .. the Lord help
you understand."
Chapter
11 This is the chapter where Mack meets with a lady
judge, who I'm not sure who she is to represent.
One thing I do believe the author has wrong here is that God has
nail-prints in His hand. God
the Father did not die on the cross.
I don't believe He has nail prints in His hands.
I don't even believe He has hands.
I've heard some people complain about the
emotionalism in this chapter. I
have no problem with that. Many
non-Pentecostal/Charismatics don't understand that our Lord can and does
touch our emotions. Chapter
12 I do like the point the author makes that death is
more devastating to man on earth than it is for God and for those who
have already passed away. We
as Christians often live as though death is final, when the Bible says
just the opposite. Chapter
13 Live and love without an agenda the author says.
I think I understand what he is saying but Christians do have an
agenda. Jesus gave us the
great commission. That's an
agenda. Jesus loved because
He had and has an agenda. I
understand unconditional love, but love has boundaries based on Biblical
truth, and we do have an agenda. The author quotes Jesus as saying that He doesn't
want to make everyone Christians. He's
got people of all religious persuasions.
It sounds too post-modern to me.
It sound like the Chapter
14 The author says that God has no expectations of us.
I think God certainly understands our limitations, but I'm far
from convinced that He has no expectations of us, especially as
Christians. If this were not
so, for example, why is He so hard on the seven churches of Revelation. The book also says that God is never unhappy with us.
That's just not right. Once
again, the seven churches of Revelation shows that.
Look at how God responded to I found this chapter way to philosophical.
I can't see any non-Christian understanding this at all. Chapter
15 No comment. I'm
getting board. Chapter
16 The author promotes a false view of forgiveness.
He promotes more of a worldly view, even a new age view of
forgiveness that many Christians today have fallen for because they
don't understand what the Bible says about forgiveness. The author says that forgiveness is letting go, and
also, letting go of the hold you have around the offender's neck.
That is not Biblical forgiveness.
Biblical forgiveness is the process
by which one cancels the offence of sin once the offender repents.
Forgiveness is the process by which the offense and all of its
consequences are wiped out of our mental record book.
This can only take place once the offender acknowledges the
offense and changes his mind on the offense, which is called repentance.
God demands us to repent, and only then are we forgiven.
He does not ask us to something He Himself does not do.
Without the offender repenting, there is no forgiveness.
Chapter
17 No comment. Mack
returns to real life. Chapter
18 Sorry, but I still haven't finished reading the book,
more than a year after I stated.
|