The Shack

I just finished William Paul Young's famed fictional novel The Shack. (Notice the qualifying use of "fictional.") Overall, I enjoyed the book. It was an intriguing story and a good read. Unlike Dr. Mohler, it took me more than one sitting to get through it, but suffice it to say I'm glad I read it.

Longer, more detailed, extremely helpful, highly intellectual reviews can be found elsewhere.* I'll simply say that what I found in The Shack was a good story. Mr. Young has a unique way of putting things and I enjoyed engaging his ideas (Mack's ideas?) about God. But overall, the book is just confusing enough theologically that I wouldn't recommend it. I think Tim Challies said it best when he dubbed the book "quietly subversive":

Throughout the book there is this kind of subversive strain teaching that new and fresh revelation is much more relevant and important than the kind of knowledge we gain in sermons or seminaries or Scripture. ... At several points I felt as if the author was encouraging the reader to doubt what they know of Christianity—to deconstruct what they know of Christian theology—and to embrace something new. But the faith Young reconstructs is simply not the faith of the Bible.

Well said, Tim.

Do I think The Shack is devoid of value? Certainly not. I will be glad if this book causes people to come into a relationship with God. But I will also be surprised if that is the case. Mr. Young does little to point people toward the true and living God. Instead, he makes the path even more confusing by combining truth and error in a wonderfully captivating tale.

As I've heard it said, "a little truth mixed with a little error is a dangerous thing."

Ultimately, though it has its good points, The Shack leaves its reader with "a potentially perilous misunderstanding of important scriptural truths." But Young surely presents a compelling novel** that will continue to make waves far into the future. Have you read it? What do you think?


_____________________________________
*I will say, however, that I disagree with Tim's assessment of forgiveness (that repentance is needed before forgiveness can be offered). We have no indication that the thief on the cross beside Jesus repented of his sin, yet Jesus welcomed him into the kingdom.

**Not so compelling that it should be compared to Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress, though. Seriously? I was blown away by that endorsement. I join many other people in wondering if Eugene Peterson really read The Shack!