Home Who We Are From Dennis Newkirk

Book Review - The Shack

I’ve been hearing a lot about “The Shack” recently.  Just in case you are not aware of the book, it is an extraordinarily popular theological fiction novel by William P. Young.  It is well written, intense, entertaining, and an illustration of an unbiblical movement known as the Emergent Church Conversation.  I do not recommend the book, even though there are redeeming qualities, and it is a compelling story.

Would you like a review of the book from a biblical perspective?  Click on the following links:

http://www.challies.com/archives/book-reviews/the-shack-by-william-p-young.php

http://www.insight.org/site/PageServer?pagename=shack_details

http://www.carm.org/features/theshack.htm

http://www.reformedbrethren.com/2008/05/the-shack-a-popular-book-full-of-heresy/

http://www.breakpoint.org/listingarticle.asp?ID=7830

Also, listen to the president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary’s radio program that reviewed the book at:

http://www.almohler.com/radio_show.php?cdate=2008-04-11

As Christians, we must be spiritually discerning.  So many of us are misled by Oprah’s version of new age religion, Joel Osteen’s unbiblical positive thinking message, the Emergent Church writers, and this book by William P. Young!  Read with a clear view of what the Bible itself says and be cautious when reading “Pop-Theology” and Christian self-help books. 

Dennis

Comments are now closed on this blog post.

Posted on Saturday, August 9, 2008 by Dennis Newkirk filed under

5 comments ()

1. mr anderson wrote:
it is interesting that you wrap oprah winfrey with joel osteen, emergent church writers and william young. i, like you, do not agree with everything joel osteen, the emergent church and william young believes. and i, like you encourage people to 'test everything and hold on to what is good.' but the judgemental tone of your statement does more harm to the movement of Christ than it does good. satan prowls around looking for ways to devour us - and he does so in our judgmentalism and disunity. there is so much more for us to spend our time and energy on than bashing a book like the shack.

August 19, 2008 @ 2:16 PM

2. Dennis Newkirk wrote:
Shack bashing! The book, "The Shack" is a wildly popular book. Hardly a week goes by without some saying how much they loved the book.

When I make critical statements about a speaker or author, I do so for specific purposes. First, the speaker or book is influencing people. That is the speaker or author's purpose and they have gone into the public arena to declare their beliefs. I know of no other way warn our members of error without making a public statement. My purpose isn't to bash, it is to warn and protect.

Additionally, I'm not usually saying that everything about an author or speaker is bad. In the case of "The Shack," there are positive values. However, interwoven in these values we find serious doctrinal error about crucial biblical issues. As I mentioned in my previous post, these are serious enough that a word of caution and a plea for discernment seems very appropriate to me.

It is never my goal to insult or exasperate, as I have apparently done to the well-meaning friend who responded to my post above. This is, nonetheless, a risk of taking the biblical imperatives of a pastor's role seriously. Again, I do not want to bash The Shack but I do suggest that if you enter into it, you do so with your eyes wide open.

Dennis

August 21, 2008 @ 5:01 PM

3. sandy gard wrote:
i enjoyed reading the shack. i read it as a fiction book. i came away with the idea that God meets us where we are in our life. that it is about relationship not religion. forgiveness is key to keeping hate out of your heart. i also was very much aware while reading that i can talk to God and he does know me just like i am faults and all. i never read looking for eastern influences. i think most people in our bible belt area that would read this book that aren't familiar with the bible would not look for eastern influences. they would probably be like me and simply find the things i did and not look for a bible reference to every statement in a fictional book. if a person is looking for eastern influences they will find them. if their looking for God he will find them.

August 24, 2008 @ 7:08 AM

4. Jenny wrote:
I'm 47 yrs. old and a faithful servant of Christ. I picked up the book on a whim one day recently and thank God that I did. I regard The Shack as one of the best pieces of "fiction" that I've ever read. Since it is a work of fiction, it's fair to say that the author had every right to take creative license. I don't see how you can hold the author's feet to the fire on doctrine. I think he did a wonderful job of creatively making Christianity appealing to a mass audience and for a long standing Christian like myself, he did an equally wonderful job of personalizing God in a way that has challenged me to be more faithful in my walk with Christ. If Mr. Young had written this book as a book on Christian theology, I would wholeheartedly agree that it should be measured carefully against the Bible, but he did not. While is story may not be entirely theologically sound, again, remembering that it's fiction, it is full of redeeming qualities including compassion, redemption and forgiveness and the love of our God. I cannot in good conscience not tell my family and friends about this book.

August 24, 2008 @ 7:15 PM

5. thomas tonsky wrote:
I liked your comment regarding reading the book with a clear head. Once I started to read the bible with a clear head I realized how the traditions of men have rendered the word ineffective. Paul tells us in 2 Cor 5 that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, NOT COUNTING MEN'S SINS AGAINST THEM. Our ministry is to go out and tell the world that God is not counting their sins against them because Jesus paid for them already at Calvary. That seems pretty clear to me, but I don't know of a single church that does it. Maybe God is using authors like Mr. Young to get a message through that the church isn't able to receive because of it's bondage to it's own theology.

August 26, 2008 @ 7:01 PM