EMAIL THIS PAGE
PRINT
RSS
|
I recently saw this clip from a Pastor in the Seattle area named Mark Driscoll. He’s a pretty credible leader within the larger scale of the church and has a wide stroke of influence nationally. I’ve actually visited their church in Seattle and they are doing some AMAZING things in that city. Mark also has some brilliant things to say about leadership, vision and the local church. I watched this clip and for some reason it just didn’t sit right with me. Honestly, I’ve never read The Shack (and I probably need too), but, I did watch an interview that Jarett Stevens did with the Author of the book at 7:22 back in the fall. Personally, I enjoyed the interview with the Author and I thought he explained the premise on which he wrote the book and did that pretty articulately. I’m curious what your thoughts are on Marks perspective regarding The Shack. Have you read the book? Is it, truly, heretical as Mark calls it? Do you get the sense that William Paul Young is simply utilizing a story to paint a picture or is he really making a ‘false idol’ for us to try and contain? Watch the clip and post your thoughts!
|
Comments
I don't understand why people are making such a big deal about this book. First, I think that anyone who thinks this book will actually help them understand God better needs a to take a good look at what it was written for. Maybe it can stretch our thinking about God, but it should not be seen as a theological treatise. And, by the way the author himself would probably agree with me. Secondly, I think that those who are fighting the book so much need to take a good look at what they think about heresy. I think that people defining this as heresy or creating an "image" out of God really need to think "Do I want to call CS Lewis a heretic?" If it is always wrong to depict God in literature both figure and none, then by that standard Aslan is an abomination. I think that Driscoll would clearly not think of Aslan in this way, but I guess I am confused about what he is determining an image and a symbol. I think his definitions are little to vague for them to be so rigidly enforced. I think the author was not intending this to be a doctrinal statement but a creative work of fiction, and people need to lay off. If we want to criticize something correct those who look at fiction to understand doctrine. But, leave the fiction alone because I personally believe that there is plenty that is written that enriches our VIEW of God without dictating or skewing our THEOLOGY.
Brian,
Having read the Shack, I can say one thing - it is not good literature. The characters are weakly drawn and developed never going beyond weak caricatures. The plot wanders and pauses for extended moments of sappy hyperbolical emotion fests. And sections of the story seem like square pegs forced into round holes just so author Willam Paul Young can explore another aspect of his Trinity. I would argue that there are dozens upon dozens of books out there that explore spiritual themes that are better written and that can help us ask good questions about our faith and who God is.
Having said all that, the Shack is a piece of literature written by a person attempting to understand the Trinity through metaphor and personification. Again, it is not done well, but it is what it is. Young never would equate his work to Scripture nor would he argue that it is a book to establish a new perspective on Trinitarian theology. It is literature. If I remember correctly, one of the quotes on the jacket compares it to Pilgrim's Progress. A poor comparison in some ways, but apt in others. Pilgrim's Progress does not get everything correct theologically. It is a far more complex and nuanced exploration of the journey of faith and our relationship with God, but it is not without its errors. And it is not scripture. For decade upon decade, Pilgrim's Progress has created dialogue on what it means to be a Christ follower. That is perhaps the one good thing that will come form this book - people are interested in talking about a theologically rich and complex subject again - the Trinity.
On a side note, one additional issues I have with the Shack is this - it perpetuates this idea that the only way that we can every truly know God is to isolate ourselves from the real world, from our families, and from our community. Then God will reveal himself to us. This is bunk as it champions the individual over community .
Driscoll embodies a larger segment of the church that feels the need to find things to be against. Especially things that are growing in influence and gaining popularity. As a result, he looks for ways to criticize the book and in the process finds himself missing the point. As has been pointed out, simply because Eugene Peterson compared it to Pilgrim's Progress doesn't mean that Young set out to make it so - nor does it make the book Scripture.
Honestly, though, there is not much that is off theologically with the book. Young takes a creative approach and takes some liberties to explore facets of the Trinity that most may not, but I don't recall ever coming to a point in the book and thinking "wow, this is heresy." Whether written well or not (which seems to go both ways) I thought it was a great story and did much by way of making this being we call God more relate-able.
So, yeah, Driscoll goes overboard and makes himself look like a douche in the process, but I would still highly recommend the book to anyone, especially those who tend to keep their distance from church/Christianity.
Jesse, I was just about to post the same thing about Driscoll. He's a sensationalist. He seems to be hot or cold on every issue, and in doing so, he makes himself "the boy who cried wolf"in his disdain for so many things. I'm not surprised he has strong issues on it, one way or the other, but I think he's taking it a little too seriously.
I would think it's clear to most that this is a metaphorical fictional story and not a theological study. It's allegory - a literary device that doesn't lend itself to distinct aplogetic storytelling.
pretty good exposition on how to care for term papers online hobby setup. I didn't know you could do this but you learn something new everyday.