After much prodding I’ve finally gotten around to reading The Shack, written by William Paul Young. It’s not that I didn’t want to read it, but that other things seemed to be lined up ahead of it. I had an opportunity to hear the author interviewed at the National Pastor’s Convention this year, so this spurred me a little more. Since so many other bloggers have commented on the book, I thought that I would join the fray.
As with any book, including the Bible, one’s critique or commentary is likely to be more of a reflection of oneself than of the book. Thus, those who take issue with the book reveal something about their own theology in the process and those who resonate with it do the same. Although I have yet to finish the book, I find myself in camp with the latter group.
First, it seems to me that the book is a modern attempt to replicate the book of Job. How do we deal with the issue of theodicy (bad things happening to people)? At some time in our lives we will all likely experience evil in some tragic form, which will prompt us to ask the same question: why? This, I think, is why this book is so popular. It connects with us on common ground. With that said, here is part 1 of….uh…several parts on The Shack.
I find the characterization of God refreshing. I realize that some struggle with God being depicted as a woman, though there is really no biblical reason to do so. The author explains the reason for this as well as the reason why God (Papa) is presented in this way. Can it be that God may take any form he/she chooses? Hmmm, let’s see, he wrestled with Jacob seemingly as a human and apparently appeared to Elijah in a whisper (whatever that looks like). The reason I find this characterization so refreshing is because it keeps us from pigeonholing God, as we are wont to do. God, as the story shows, is far beyond our imagination.
I am intrigued by the way the author deals with the Trinity. He seems to hold to a classic view. However, I appreciate the emphasis he gives to the mutuality that takes place within the Godhead. Namely, that there is no hierarchy, but mutual submission. This provides a model for those who would imitate the personification of the Godhead, Jesus. Jesus demonstrates submission, service and love, representing on earth how things are in heaven and thus showing us how we were intended to be.
I also appreciate that the Holy Spirit is given more than a passing nod and is not presented as simply an “It”. In “The Shack” the Spirit is a person, specifically a female. This should be less difficult for people to swallow, since the biblical word for “Spirit” is a feminine word (although it is neuter in Greek). Also, we are given images of the Spirit as a female in scripture. For instance, Jesus says that Spirit gives birth to spirit. Men do not give birth.
I do think, however, that Young is a little over the top is his description of Sarayu (the Holy Spirit). There are a few too many comments about her seeming to move with the breeze. I suppose that this is an attempt to demonstrate the biblical concept for the Spirit. The biblical terms used (Hebrew – Ruach and Greek – Pneuma) are translated as breath, wind, or spirit. The notion, of course, being one of God’s life-breath, but also that the Spirit is like the wind. “The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit” (Jn. 3:8). It’s certainly valid, it just gets repeated a little much for me.
If you can get past depictions about God that go against traditional images, I think that you will find the book a good read. Those I know who have experienced tragedy in their lives recently really resonate with it. Next time I’ll talk about how the book discusses the existence of evil and whether or not God is the cause.
