[JohnnyM]

you take things WAY too personally.

A little leaven, leavens the whole lump of dough. 95% of The Shack could be spot on, but it's that 5% people have to worry about. I'm just warning against taking this book as the gospel truth or elevating it to the level of Scripture.

It seems that anyone that has issues with the book is all the sudden some sort of monster who has evil motives, and it is simply not the case.

I have issues with a book that says this about God:

“Mack was surprised. ‘How can that be? Why would the God of the universe want to be submitted to me?’”

So sue me.

JM

[marbren]

Do you think the author’s motive for writing The Shack is evil?

[Quix]

No.

It’s a novel. It was written primarily and first only to his children.

I does not have anything remotely close to the place of Scripture, to me.

I just hate seeing folks up in arms over little to nothing or because of distorting a great book.

Christ washed the feet of His disciples. That was a huge degree of “submission” in that culture.

I found nothing of significance in the book that could not be referenced to Scripture.

Whether the reference to Scripture would satisfy everyone is a whole different level of craziness.

I’ve never read any nonBible book that I agreed with 100%.

Have you?

I don’t think folks who have issues with the book are monsters.

You made an issue of

AUTHORITY.

That’s something I have some professional experience with studying and researching.

You pressed the button on that data file.

Cheers.