I picked up the following article, written by free-lance writer, John Lanagan, on the Lighthouse Trails website. Lanagan wrote it after attending a church meeting at which The Shack author, Paul Young, spoke. The article is a warning to believers. The Shack is full of universalistic theology. Because it has been marketed and presented as a Christian book, I felt it wise to join John and Lighthouse in issuing a warning.
"For if he who comes preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or if you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted--you may well put up with it!" (2 Corinthians 11:4)
This "different spirit" was welcomed during a recent church service in Gresham, Oregon. Paul Young, author of The Shack, spoke to the East Hill congregation during the opening night of a five weekend series called, appropriately enough, The Shack. Sometimes on the verge of tears, and possessing great rapport with the crowd, Young was given a standing ovation.
Before the author spoke, a father stood before the congregation with his young child. His prayer was his child would love what the Lord loves, and hate the things the Lord hates. On that same altar stood a constructed replica of "the shack," a stage prop for the evening's festivities. The question must be asked, does the Lord love what is happening through The Shack?
In an interview with Pastor Kendall Adams of KAYP Radio, Paul Young denied the substitutionary Atonement of Christ. [1] (for transcript, click here) In other words, the author of this bestselling book does not believe Christ was punished on the Cross by the Father for our sins. This is a central doctrine of our faith - that Jesus willingly took our place of punishment and that through His sacrifice we can have eternal life. Increasingly, The Shack is being accepted by "Bible-believing" churches. Although East Hill Church is not the first to do so, its promotion and use of the novel as a teaching tool guarantees more open doors for the author.
Does the book's theology concern East Hill leadership? The Shack has "theological gaps," agreed Senior Pastor Jason Albelo, but the five part series will proceed as planned. Albelo, who had not heard the author's denial of substitutionary Atonement, emphasized he was not "arguing the theology of The Shack," but, rather, "I'm using its theology of healing."
Yes, but why? The Bible is replete with those who have been saved, sanctified, delivered, defended, and cherished. This "theology of healing," on the other hand, is not based on Christ or His Word. For many in the audience that night, this may not have been understood - or may not have mattered.
With all due respect to Pastor Albelo, who courteously fielded my post-service questions, East Hill leadership cannot choose to disassociate from anti-biblical aspects of the book if they are promoting a five weekend series based on it. "Can two walk together, unless they are agreed?" (Amos 3:3)
According to East Hill's Small Group study guide for The Shack, "Practice reading/thinking in light of God's Word. As you read, or re-read, The Shack, highlight any truths about God and relationships. Take time to do some Bible exploring, and make notes of scriptures on which those truths are based." [2]
Perhaps the "reading/thinking in light of God's Word" could also be applied to those "theological gaps" Pastor Albelo mentioned. For example (and there are many), the god of The Shack, unlike the God of the Bible, does not mete out eternal punishment. The novel's "god" says, "I don't need to punish sin. Sin is its own punishment, devouring you from the inside. It's not my purpose to punish it, it's my joy to cure it." [3] Everyone who has read The Shack has been exposed to this teaching - and make no mistake, it is a teaching.
Does the Bible teach that the Lord does not punish? Well, no. According to the Word of God, "[W]hen the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. These shall be punished with everlasting destruction" (2 Thessalonians 1:7-9).
This is the good news of the gospel - that we who repent of our sin and make Jesus our Lord do not have to suffer everlasting destruction. But to pretend that eternal hell does not await those who reject Christ is to deny the authority of the Bible. And maybe that is the point.
"For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because He has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." (John 3:17-18)
A hard Truth? Yes. But a gentle Savior. "For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are yet without sin. Let us come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need." (Hebrews 4:15-16)
When The Shack was originally written and submitted to publishers, it proclaimed ultimate reconciliation - "Christian" universalism - which is the belief that through Jesus all people go to heaven - Satanists, Mormons, Hindus, and every Christ-rejecting person that has ever lived. While the editors of The Shack have stated they removed UR from the book [4], the novel nevertheless seems to subtly and frequently promote universalism.
For the author, the hope for UR apparently has never changed. He told Pastor Kendall Adams, "Even if there was ultimate reconciliation, which I don't know, but even if there were, that doesn't diminish the damage of sin at all." [5] It doesn't? UR totally contradicts the gospel message of Jesus Christ. The Bible, the Lord's love letter, is our road map through life and into eternity.
"Your word I have treasured in my heart, That I may not sin against You. Blessed are You, O Lord; teach me your statutes." (Psalm 119:11-12)
At East Hill, the author spoke of his tortured past, and of the love of God. At one point, speaking of the years spent trying to overcome his pain, he said, "Praying didn't work, fasting didn't work, reading Scripture didn't help..."
Those words drifted out there like poison balloons. When I mentioned this to Pastor Albelo, he said, "Come on, you know that is out of context." My own Pastor, in attendance that night, said later, "Think of all the unbelievers and new believers who heard Paul Young say that."
"But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves." (2 Peter 2:1)
East Hill is not the first mega-church to promote The Shack, and will certainly not be the last. The apostate church is rising, and The Shack has successfully introduced the beginnings of goddess worship, a false Christ, and a denial of the purpose of the cross.
Please understand I am not calling East Hill apostate. All churches need to be careful that books and movies don't supersede God's Word as our means of teaching Truth. Many people cheering for The Shack are looking for God. Some don't understand He primarily reveals Himself through Scripture. Some do not understand repentance. Others, however, simply don't want the God of the Bible. The Shack has given them a glossy substitute. The apostate church will consist of those who truly believe they are worshiping Christ.
I very much appreciate Pastor Albelo's patience while listening to my concerns. As we spoke, with that makeshift "shack" on the altar behind us, he noted he couldn't "police every book."
"No," I said, "but you don't have to promote them, either."
Guest Blogger, John
Free-lance writer
Endnotes:
1. http://rock-life.com/files/shakcomp.mp3
2. Understanding The Shack (Part 1) Jason Albelo 3/14-15/09
3. William P. Young, The Shack, pg. 120
4. Wayne Jacobsen, "Is The Shack Heresy?"
5. http://rock-lifecom.files/shakcomp.mp3
5 comments:
William Paul Young's book, The Shack, spent 43 weeks as the number one book on the New York Times Best Seller List. Awesome book. I like it so much.
43 weeks on a best seller list, even one as "important" as the ny times list, does not say anything about truth or error. millions of readers does not validate the message's veracity. with all due respect and love in Christ, if you do not believe that Jesus died for our sins in our place so that we do not have to be condemned for eternity, if you do believe, as it seems "papa" does in your book, that buddhists, mormons, etc., can be children of God without putting their faith in Jesus, the only thing your 43 weeks on the best seller list means is that lots of people were taken in by a well-written (i did appreciate the quality of the storytelling), but deceiving book. Jesus' substitutionary atonement is not a minor tenet of the faith. it is the heart and soul of the good news. if he did not die in our place, we are all without hope. we are still in our sin and destined for Hell. i hope that the report from Lighthouse, that you do not believe Jesus was punished on the cross for our sins, is not true. i will appreciate your comments if you choose to continue this conversation.
Sadly Mikey, the comment by the author which ignores any substance of the criticism, and points only to the financial and cultural success it had, demonstrates that money rather than truth is likely the thrust behind the author's intentions.
Jesus spoke direct to that issue...
tr
That wasn't the real author who posted above. Either way, the book has problems. I'm reading it so I can respond to the fuss and the fans of it. Ugh.
i wondered about the ID on the first comment.
Post a Comment