This book is making big inroads with many friends and aquaintances that are professed Christians. Like Colson said, if it isn’t the Scriptural portrayal of God, it is only as good as the feelings it generates. Many people claim that this book has given them a new understanding of God, but I am skeptical if what they are given is true understanding. For my money, comprehension of the things of God always comes at the cost of self-sacrifice and is always in line with what Scripture has already revealed. Sad to say, too many enamored with this book seem to be looking for easier ways to know God other than the cross.
I believe that's why some turn to Buddhism. Adherence to it doesn't seem to be too dependent on one's personal behavior, so one doesn't necessarily need to change it to feel good about being a Buddhist. I could be wrong, but that's the idea I've gotten from some folks.
**For my money, comprehension of the things of God always comes at the cost of self-sacrifice and is always in line with what Scripture has already revealed. **
Amen!
If going what Mack (or the author) goes through is an easy way to know God then I sure wouldn't want a hard way!
Paul Young wrote the book as a way of expressing what he learned from VERY difficult life experiences.
For the record, the book does not intend to be taken as an example of an experience that we might have. It is best understood as a "photo-realistic parable" (especially to those like me who know many of the places in the book.
I find that most critics of the book either haven't read it or take statements very much out of context.
I *do* have some points at which I sharply differ from the author but this book does a wonderful job of showing God's loving heart -- even in VERY difficult circumstances.