[dawn53]

It’s a novel, not a theology book. I read all the skepticism, then I read the book and thoroughly enjoyed it. I didn’t read it as a theology book, I read it as a novel, and I don’t base my theology on novels, so I have no problem with it.

[Tuscaloosa Goldfinch]

I couldn't read it - a friend gave it to me, stressing that it would change how I viewed God, that it was comforting - but when I started reading it I felt it was "off", the same way the prosperity gospel is "off" and the "name it and claim it" teaching is "off.

Before we read anything I think, especially something of a theological nature, we should investigate the view of Christ and Christianity the author possesses. What is William P. Young's view of hell, for instance? Does he believe in it or not?

We do the same thing with the main stream media when they report/fail to report the news, don't we? Why should we do any less with something far more important?

Sarayu, for instance, who is supposed to be the Holy Spirit's character. What does that name mean, where does it come from? Does it have an origin?

[Terriergal]

It’s a novel, not a theology book

Tell that to the author:
http://www.bereanwatchmen.com/j.r.hall/the-shack-a-review.html

Young says he wrote the book at his wife's prodding, to explain his 11-year journey of healing with God to their six children. The "shack" in Young's story represents deep personal wounds, both suffered and inflicted. The book is spiritual autobiography (in one web interview, Young says Mack is "basically me") cast in an alternative world, an imaginative attempt to condense 11 years into a weekend of conversations. These are words offered by a 53-year-old father to his children, a fictionalized tale of his relationship with God mended in deep darkness.1

It is because of statements like these that many people have said that we should not look into The Shack's theology; as a fictional autobiography, it is not meant to be a book teaching us about the things of God... or is it?

We should take careful note here that Mr. Young has at no time rebuked anyone for using his 'fictional' book to teach new spiritual truths. Even though he might have originally stated that the book was not to be taken as theology, he has since recanted thanks (I'm sure) to its unprecedented success in Christendom.

“I absolutely am convinced that this is a God-thing that God is the One stirring this all up, challenging us to rethink and entertain growing deeper in a relationship with Him rather than pursuing our independence,” 2

My friends, this book is indeed about theology and has impacted people as such.

Footnotes:
1. Derek R. Keefe, Reading in Good Faith, Chrstianity Today,
2. http://www.christianpost.com/article/20081027/-the-shack-author-insists-bestseller-is-a-god-thing.htm

[Salvation]

*8It’s a novel, not a theology book.**

That’s the trouble. The sheeple don’t know the difference.