So I was listening to Mark Driscoll talking about the Trinity today, and he was talking about the Shack. which our church has recommended people read. I don’t usually post my disagreements with other church leaders on here, but I just had to. And normally I think Driscoll is encouraging and challenging in a good way, I totally dig on his teaching. But I couldn’t let this one go, because he’s painting everyone who reads this book as a Heretic, and that’s just wrong and it’s not his job.
I think that the biggest struggle that Driscoll is having with the book is Metaphor. William Young is not saying that God is a woman, or that the Holy Spirit is an asian chick. The whole thing is a metaphor trying to get across one of the most complex issues in our doctrine in an accessible way.
Driscoll argues that the book proposes modalism, which is a weak arguement because throughout the story you see that the Trinity is independent and yet unified. They are all working together, in Community and Love.
Pilgrim’s Progress, Hind’s Feet on High Places, The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe and the Shack are all efforts to teach people the love and grace and mercy of God in a way that is accessible. Are they going to get it 100% accurate to the nth degree? Are they going to throw footnotes in all over the place? No. It’s a story, it’s a metaphor. If it helps people get a grasp on the love of God, and if it sets them in the right direction to ask more questions and to continue to pursue Jesus then it has worked.
Jesus said that the Kingdom of God is like a woman who lost a coin and went looking for it. In all this kingdom of God, are we really just under the bed of this woman who is doing her spring cleaning? No, it’s a metaphor. So is the Shack.
The struggle that I am having with these hip, cool, new reformed Pastors is that they are uncomfortable with metaphor, and questions. And the danger is that they are going to get into a place where they are looked at like just the Reincarnate Jerry Falwell (but they vote democrat instead of republican).
Dude, It’s a Metaphor! You can’t read it like a treatise. Relax, breathe, take you meds and lay off the red bull.
-
Neat Links
-
Recent Comments
lydia on Youth Leaders Meeting = A… Brian Deuman on Grad School Here I Come Des on Dude, It’s a Metaph… nant on Ezekiel 37 Izzy on Largest Churches
-
My Flickr
More Photos
April 3, 2008 at 6:51 pm
Great post. I love it when people get all fired up about something that is “just a story.” I agree, no more Red Bull.
April 6, 2008 at 8:26 am
Smells a little bit Da Vinci Code to me…
Hopefully I’ll get time to read The Shack soon.
April 8, 2008 at 3:49 pm
Do you think he really read the book?
April 10, 2008 at 3:57 pm
I have been melted by the love of God in a powerful way because of The Shack. As I came to terms with how unconditional God’s love is for me I experienced a freedom that words can’t describe– all bitterness that I had towards others vanished! The challenge is this– God’s love is something that will never be recieved and understood intelectually. I was a full time pastor for almost a decade and struggled greatly because I was blind to the person of Father God. I helped no one by giving out my biblical formulas. Pauls words in Galatians have helped set me free and The Shack was more fuel to the fire. If you want to learn more spiritual knowledge please don’t read The Shack. If you want to encounter the living God you may want to get yourself a copy. I hope you are devasted by His love like myself and many others that I know!
April 10, 2008 at 9:17 pm
Brian thanks for those thoughts.
Julie, I don’t want to speculate on whether or not Driscoll read the book.
Jesse, Don’t worry, there are no codes in this entire book, and no mysterious albinos out for blood.
July 7, 2008 at 3:26 pm
A great post. It concerns me when I listen to Mark Driscoll’s ‘message’ as to whether he has any understanding of literature genre. Having said that, the Bible, although ‘the Word of God’ is literature (it is written) and consists of various genre and therefore I would be most hesitant to take too seriously anything that Mark might understand from the Bible. If he can interpret things in “The Shack” as he does, maybe he will interpret things in the Bible in a manner that God never intended.