The Shack

[lydia81]

I agree with Eric's view also.

There is no advantage in Christians simply not reading ANYTHING because it might somehow tarnish their faith. Yet they spend all day watching the crap on TV.

This book is a positive work that I think will indeed work to bring many people to Christ. I mean we are arguing about its depiction of the Trinity in this instance, and all freaked out because one part of the Trinity presents itself as a women, however, the book goes on to say that the nature of God in the Trinity IS as a Father and male, God can show Himself however He chooses; but in this book at least it shows a Trinity, it seems to be the fashion today for Evangelicals to reject the Trinity as being too Catholic.

The coming apostasy which I now see invading the Evangelical Churches is a rejection of the Trinity, from that perspective this book is a very very good thing in fighting that heresy.

Couple of thoughts on this. I, too cannot understand why some Christians reject any reading other than the bible. I tried to get my friend at work to read some women's devotionals, and she rejected them, citing she only reads the bible.

Second thought : Why is it when Hollywood makes a movie, any time a church is portrayed in a movie, it must be Catholic? Is that Hollywood's stereotype of the church or do they honestly beleive thats the only church in existence?

To clarify, I am not against reading Christian commentaries, works of devotions or even fiction conveying principles of righteous morality in more modern circumstances and settings.

I am against fictional books depicting the God head as a man or women, see my post above.

I am against fiction books and movies about the end times because they are the interpretation of an individual and present conclusions and assumptions as actually things that will happen in actual places. They establish false markers and milestone to which people will look instead praying and reading their own bibles and watching for the signs of His coming.

WELL SAID Blindseeker! I know enough about the author to not want to pick up any novel written by him. Young is one to embrace the idea of "Christian Universalism" and has defended this view on several occasions. He disavows "general universalism", but he has affirmed his hope that all will be reconciled to God either this side of death or after death.

[EricH]

I agree with Eric's view also.

There is no advantage in Christians simply not reading ANYTHING because it might somehow tarnish their faith. Yet they spend all day watching the crap on TV.

This book is a positive work that I think will indeed work to bring many people to Christ. I mean we are arguing about its depiction of the Trinity in this instance, and all freaked out because one part of the Trinity presents itself as a women, however, the book goes on to say that the nature of God in the Trinity IS as a Father and male, God can show Himself however He chooses; but in this book at least it shows a Trinity, it seems to be the fashion today for Evangelicals to reject the Trinity as being too Catholic.

The coming apostasy which I now see invading the Evangelical Churches is a rejection of the Trinity, from that perspective this book is a very very good thing in fighting that heresy.

Couple of thoughts on this. I, too cannot understand why some Christians reject any reading other than the bible. I tried to get my friend at work to read some women's devotionals, and she rejected them, citing she only reads the bible.

Second thought : Why is it when Hollywood makes a movie, any time a church is portrayed in a movie, it must be Catholic? Is that Hollywood's stereotype of the church or do they honestly beleive thats the only church in existence?

To clarify, I am not against reading Christian commentaries, works of devotions or even fiction conveying principles of righteous morality in more modern circumstances and settings.

I am against fictional books depicting the God head as a man or women, see my post above.

I am against fiction books and movies about the end times because they are the interpretation of an individual and present conclusions and assumptions as actually things that will happen in actual places. They establish false markers and milestone to which people will look instead praying and reading their own bibles and watching for the signs of His coming.

WELL SAID Blindseeker! I know enough about the author to not want to pick up any novel written by him. Young is one to embrace the idea of "Christian Universalism" and has defended this view on several occasions. He disavows "general universalism", but he has affirmed his hope that all will be reconciled to God either this side of death or after death.

God himself has stated that it his desire that all come to repentance (not all will of course). There is nothing wrong with desiring that.

[EricH]

If some of the works bt C.S. Lewis were held to the same standard as this book is being held (and is author) most of us would ne be reading C.S. Lewis

I was never too big on C.S. Lewis, to be honest I only read the Screwtape Letters and skimmed though A case for Christianity.

However, just how many of his books address the concept of the Trinity, the Deity of Christ and the chronological events of the last days?

These are topics in my opinion that when addressed in fiction becomes riddled with error and lowly man's opinion and establishes false milestones which people look for that will never appear . . . plus God is not such a one as us and His ways are not our ways and His thoughts are way above out thoughts.

There have been stories since men sat around and amused themselves and there is always some "good and evil" in the stories but that does not make them true or godly.

In the animated movie Mulan it opens when the Huns invade China. The Chinese emperor then commands a general mobilization in which each family is given a conscription notice. Mulan's father Fa Zhou receives from the Imperial forces his conscription notice and having no son is forced to enlist despite his age. To protect her aging father Mulan poses as a man and joins the army in his place.

A small dragon Mushu accompanied also by a cricket travels with her to protect her and to make her a war hero in an attempt to regain dignity among the spirits of dead family ancestors by. Throughout the whole movie good and evil are presented and defined with good being the final victor over the evil. Throughout the movie people become emotionally sided with the good Mulan and loathe the evil Huns leader Shan Yu . . . but again that does not make it godly or a true representation of good and evil.

The same emotions but on a stronger scale are aroused by the story of William Wallace as seen in the movie Brave Heart . . . but that does not make him good or godly, or more righteous than those he wars against.

Stories are designed to arouse strong emotions and feelings and cause admiration for heroes and disdain for villains . . . often because we find some identification of the characters with some in real life . . . and I do not doubt that such feelings are generated by this book. But emotions will always choose sides, the same in the movie Gladiator . . . that is why they are given to be avenues for the relief and expression of the heart, but not the leaders thereof.

The problem is God is not such a one as we are and fictional stories about God that bring Him down to our dimension will play with emotions and give way for identifications with falsities as truth.

C.S. Lewis

[BlindSeeker]

The Lord teaches you with parables things you don't see in scripture? Do you mean parables outside of the Bible?

Can you show me one parable in the Bible about the Trinity?

Why would we need one outside of it? Is the Bible insufficient?

Luke 15:4-The Son

Luke 15:8- The Holy Spirit

Luke 15:11-The Father.

Thank you for giving me all you could fine.

These verses do not make up

[BlindSeeker]

But of course God has shown Himself as a human being it is also part of His nature, God is and was Jesus. To understand the Trinity we must realize that Jesus is God, and that Jesus walked on this earth as a man.

People did speak directly to God, people ate with God, people shared fellowship with God, people cried on God's literal shoulder, people touched God and hugged Him.

The Holy Spirit is God, the Holy Spirit is inside of our literal bodies, the Holy Spirit speaks to us.

So depicting God speaking to someone in some shape or form is not a problem.

Not when God does it.

I guess the whole "Mother God" movement out there is benign as well . . .

[BlindSeeker]

CS Lewis believed in purgatory, and many of his fiction books were not completely orthodox (The Great Divorce, Space Trilogy (which touches on end-times) etc. The comparisson to Hal Lindey is not really valid. Lindsey's book was not written as fiction. It was written as fact (to teach end-time events). The Shack is fiction. Thats what the author claims for it.

You have given many reasons here to avoid the works of men concerning spiritual things . . . and even though Hal Lindsey didn't intend to write a book of fiction, it is obvious he did.

As you say, " It was written as fact to teach end-time events," which time proved to be bogus.

I am just amazed people here are "claiming" an admitted work of fiction is a great help/aid for some to understand the characters and workings of the Trinity . . .

The absence of discernment in the matter is really disheartening. No wonder so many are easily taken captive according to his will.

2Ti 2:25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;

26 And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.

[Guest man]

I have an idea.

Instead of arguing back and forth....."It's a good book......No it's not......Yes it is.........No it's not....blah, blah, blah.

Why don't those of you who praise the Shack as an inspirational book, post some quotes from the book to show us what makes it so inspirational?

And those of you who see the Shack in a different light, do the same. What makes this book not worth reading?

[abbershay]

i really enjoyed the book it made God more personalable to me and he was already personable to me. It opened my eyes to see things more like how God sees us and how he loves everyone.

[BlindSeeker]

i really enjoyed the book it made God more personalable to me and he was already personable to me. It opened my eyes to see things more like how God sees us and how he loves everyone.

Interesting that a work was fiction was needed or used by (?) to accomplish that.

Perhaps you can expound on what part of the book enlighten you more to God.

[Smalcald]

But of course God has shown Himself as a human being it is also part of His nature, God is and was Jesus. To understand the Trinity we must realize that Jesus is God, and that Jesus walked on this earth as a man.

People did speak directly to God, people ate with God, people shared fellowship with God, people cried on God's literal shoulder, people touched God and hugged Him.

The Holy Spirit is God, the Holy Spirit is inside of our literal bodies, the Holy Spirit speaks to us.

So depicting God speaking to someone in some shape or form is not a problem.

Not when God does it.

I guess the whole "Mother God" movement out there is benign as well . . .

Well scripture is scripture and movements to change that are wrong. But yeah I would agree that the whole Mother God movement IS a problem, for example it probably has played into the ordination of women as ministers which is against scripture.

But this is a book of fiction which does not advocate that God is a women, in fact it speaks of the importance of us understanding God as a Father.