In the midst of pain and suffering, it is very appropriate to wrestle with the age-old question of ‘how can a good God of could allow such things in his world?’ An attempt at answering this question is offered by William (Paul) Young in ‘The Shack;’ a theodicy in the form of Christian fiction.
I will begin by assessing the claim that this book is simply ‘fiction’ and therefore is of no real concern to the church. My issue with this belief is that much can be said under the guise of fiction, while supposedly not saying anything of any consequence because ‘it is simply fiction.’ One could actually argue an author of fiction has a much greater impact than a theologian or a pastor, given the greater audience exposed, many of whom could be unaware they are getting a particular perspective on God. And make no mistake, Young is saying quite a bit concerning the nature of God, the consequences of sin, the issue of salvation, etc. In fact, the author is putting words in God’s mouth, quite literally. The question is whether his views are consistent with the God who has revealed himself in the pages of Holy Scripture.
The story is set in present-day and tells of Mack; a skeptic who experiences unimaginable pain when his daughter is tragically kidnapped. In the aftermath, his life is filled with tremendous struggle and doubt, leading up to his finding a note asking Mack to meet him at the shack; the place where the tragedy occurred. Ultimately, Mack comes to the conclusion that God has sent the letter, though Mack initially questions whether God still does the unexpected, or even the supernatural; subtly jabbing a modern Christianity that can at times look terribly similar to deism.
The culprit behind God’s perceived inactivity is scripture, or at least an interpretation that focuses more on the Bible itself than the God of that Bible (p.65-66). In the author’s defense, there are forms of Christianity are guilty of precisely this, not understanding that the scripture does point beyond itself. However, properly understood, one need not divorce scripture from the God who gave it. Our understanding of the nature, purposes, and actions of God, along with our present experience of God must be grounded in God’s Word, for this is how he speaks to his people (contra Young’s argument that God speaks to us through our thoughts [p.195]). Without God’s Word guiding us, our faith becomes nothing more than a matter of personal opinion. God’s Word continues to be active through the work of the Holy Spirit illuminating believers and bringing them into conformity with his revelation. It is no coincidence that this jab at scriptures comes toward the beginning of this book for it is reflective of what is to come.
I will say that there is much to appreciate about the book. Mack does, in fact, meet God at the shack, which is an extremely profound thought. The beauty of God meeting us at the place of our brokenness is a very worthwhile image, and should be celebrated. When he arrives, God is not presented as a one-dimensional concept, but instead as Trinity; Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The author’s shows the dynamic nature of a God who has created humanity not out of loneliness, but from a desire to share fellowship with others and bring glory to himself. Many will be uncomfortable with the portrayal of God with the Father being an Aunt Jemimah type figure instead of Gandalf, alongside Jesus as a Jewish man (no problem there), and the Holy Spirit as a Asian girl. The author will later clarify that God the Father isn’t an African-American woman any more than an old white man, but these are simply how he presents himself to Mack on a given occasion. While the traditional language of the first person of the Trinity as ‘Father’ is to be preferred, for this is how God has chosen to reveal himself, challenging our extra-biblical (sometimes contra-biblical) preconceived notions of God can be helpful. Another aspect of the book worth mentioning is Young’s discussion of the temptation to create extra-biblical rules as Christians, which can be used as a means to avoid being led by God’s Spirit. The questioning of the ‘rights’ language that has crept into modern Christianity; a concept deriving more from the Enlightenment than the scriptures is noteworthy (Our value as human beings is found more so in our having been made in the image of God, than our having individual rights). The presentation of God desiring the entirety of our lives as opposed to our compartmentalized section is fantastic, and the theme of radical forgiveness is something that should be praised.
Despite the positives, there are major problems with the book as well, ranging from what Christ actually accomplished on the cross, to a distorted view of God’s election, to the lack of any need for God’s justice to be satisfied (as opposed to his always acting only out of love). One might think that the book’s failure to provide a coherent answer to the problem of evil (a difficult thing to do) is the book’s most grievous error, given that this is the book’s theme. ‘The Shack’ wants to have it both ways in terms of God’s sovereignty and his effectiveness, stating that what happens in the world is “no plan of Papa’s” (the Father; p.165) and God discussing his efforts as “Don’t think that we didn’t try” (p.176), while also saying “there is no Plan B” and “what I wanted from the beginning, I will get” (p.192). God is presented as passive, limiting himself to accommodate the desires of human beings. While some might be attracted to this explanation, ultimately, the author undermines the hope that good can be accomplished out of evil, given God’s perceived impotence at preventing evil.
However, the bigger issue is the hope we have as believers in the midst of suffering, the gospel, is not present. The presentation of Jesus as nothing more than a perfected human, and not God incarnate (p.100), is inconsistent with the scriptures (see John 5) and destructive to the gospel. The reason Jesus could serve the mediator between God and man is because he was fully God and fully man, not simply a perfected human being.
Concerning humanity’s sinfulness, at one point, the author will quote Papa as saying, “I’ve never laid an expectation on anyone” (p.206). However, the scriptures are very clear that ‘all have fallen short of the glory of God;’ an expectation has not met due to our sin. The book also cheapens the consequences of sin in saying that “sin is its own punishment” (p.120). While the bible does present sin as its own punishment, particularly in Romans 1, this is an incomplete picture of the punishment of sin. Jesus will not only be our Savior but our judge as well, based on the criteria of our acceptance of him as Messiah. A half truth posing as an entire truth is an untruth.
Because biblical judgment is absent, the author can also give an unbiblical understanding of being a ‘child of God.’ When the scriptures speak of ‘sonship,’ this is a designation for those who have experienced adoption by virtue of coming to God by faith, not all human beings in general. As much as Jesus gives lip-service to his love for the church in ‘The Shack,’ he includes Christianity as he presents his disgust for all religions. Distinguishing Christianity from religion is helpful here. Whereas, religion is human beings’ attempts at getting to God, Christianity is God’s coming to human beings in the form of Jesus Christ, and being all that we need upon accepting the gospel. The author uses clever word plays to disguise the implication of what is meant, which is the potential for salvation outside of faith in Jesus Christ. After listing a variety of groups of people, including other religions, Jesus states, “I have no desire to make them Christian,” going on to emphasize that what he wants is a relationship (p.182). While a restored relationship is accomplished through the gospel, whether the author acknowledges belief in Jesus as necessary for that restored relationship is highly questionable.
As a result, it can be difficult to understand what the author’s is referring in his discussion of the church. Pervading the book is the author’s disdain for the institutional church, along with hierarchy in general, believing that anything resembling authority is a man-made result of ‘The Fall.’ While the need for structure is a result of ‘The Fall,’ God is the one who established authority to protect creation in its fallen state. Though it is true that servant leadership has often not been practiced in society and the church, to discard the need for authority altogether is the most extreme form of the baby/bathwater metaphor, and will only invite even greater chaos.
If Young’s critique of the Evangelical church is that it is not the community it was intended to be due to a struggle for power, this is a fair criticism in a day when churches are often run like corporations. However, the author need not present ‘either/or’ extremes to make his point. Many churches lack the genuine community pictured for the people of God, but to say that relationships are the only thing important in church life is quite the overstatement (p.178). There are many things the church should be concerned with as well, worship, evangelism, charity, justice, etc. I am reminded of the G.K. Chesterton quote, “The reformer is always right about what is wrong. He is generally wrong about what is right.” In the midst of this community, God has provided structure for its protection, and a vision for its objectives. If the church would implement God’s Word, as opposed to ignoring it, or even worse, discarding it, the church would look vastly different.
Many will read ‘The Shack’ looking for hope in the midst of tragedy. As far as the book is concerned, Mack’s greatest need is to have remedied his feelings of doubt, pain, loss, resentment and hostility. Certainly, these are real and God offers comfort knowing no bounds. But, the way this comfort is accomplished is through addressing Mack’s even greater problem; his alienation from his maker due to his sin; a relationship that can only be restored through placing his faith in Jesus Christ. This is the Christian gospel, and it is our hope. To quote the old hymn ‘The Solid Rock,’ “our hope is built on nothing less than Jesus’ blood and righteousness.”
