The Shack (Part 2)
Once Mack arrives at the shack, each person of the trinity is incarnated in the flesh and walks around in fellowship with him. God the Father (mainly called Papa in the book, but also called Elousia) is represented by an African-American woman who resembles a mother-figure and enjoys cooking. God the Holy Spirit (called Sarayu in the book) is represented by a small Asian woman who enjoys gardening and collects human tears. And God the Son (Young chooses to keep His biblical name, Jesus) is a Middle Eastern gentleman who wears blue jeans and enjoys wood work.
The number of theological topics Young discusses in the book (most of the time by having Mack talk to one of the persons of the Trinity) is so vast it would be nearly impossible to discuss each one individually. However, by looking at the few I will discuss here, I pray you will realize The Shack is something you should stay far away from.
Many say that after reading this book, they have a better understanding of the Trinity than they ever have before. I would have to say, along with Mark Driscoll (you can find his video review on YouTube), Young’s presentation of the Trinity is misleading to the point of heretical.
"Papa [the Father] didn’t answer, only looked down at their hands. His [Mack’s] gaze followed hers and for the first time Mack noticed the scars on her wrists, like those he now assumed Jesus also had on his.”
Papa goes on to say, “Don’t ever think that what my Son chose to do didn’t cost us dearly. Love always leaves a significant mark…We were there together.” Mack, attempting to be consistent with the scriptures, points out that this does not line up with Matthew 27:46, where Jesus said that Father did forsake Him. Papa responds, “You misunderstand the mystery here. Regardless of what he felt at that moment, I never left Him.” In one fail swoop, Young just denied perhaps the most important doctrine of the Christian faith: substitutionary atonement, and misrepresented the Trinity all at the same time.
First off, the Son died on the cross. The Son was incarnated in the flesh (John 1:1) and was raised from the dead by the power of the Spirit. The Father did not die on the cross, nor did the Spirit. Each of the three had a pivotal and irreplaceable role in God’s plan of salvation, but only one of the three (Jesus Christ) was to die on the cross. It was His role, not the Father’s (nor the Holy Spirit's). When Young writes, “We were there together,” he is (whether he will admit it or not) presenting modalism (one God shows up in three ‘modes’ at separate times). He further presents modalism when he writes (again writing as the Father), “When we three spoke ourselves into human existence as the Son of God, we became fully human.” No sir. All three members of the Trinity are not the Son of God. That is Jesus Christ alone. Nor were all three members of the Trinity incarnated.
The theological can of worms opened when you write something like, “The Father never actually forsook or left the Son on the cross [please note these were not Young’s exact words, it is a paraphrase],” is limitless. Such a statement denies substitutionary atonement, the very thing that saves us from our sins. If Young really believes what he has written, his understanding of God’s character, holiness, judgment, and justice are dangerously flawed. Isaiah 59:2 says, “But your iniquities have made a separation between you and your God, and your sins have hidden His face from you so that He does not hear.”
The Bible is clear: our sin separates us from God. Second Corinthians 5:21 tells us, “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.” Isaiah 53:6 says, “But the Lord has caused the iniquities of us all to fall on Him.” Jesus became sin on our behalf! If our sin separates us from God, and Christ took the weight of and became our sin on the cross, how exactly did the Father not separate from and leave Him? Isaiah 53 goes in to say in verse ten, “But the Lord was pleased to crush Him, putting Him to grief; if He would render Himself as a guilt offering.” The Father forsook Him, punished Him, and gave Him the consequence we deserved! What incredible news…and Young denies it ever even happened.
More bad teaching creeps into The Shack’s pages when the Father (Papa) tells Mack when being questioned about sin and judgment, “I don’t need to punish people for sin. Sin is its own punishment, devouring you from the inside. It’s not my purpose to punish it; it’s my joy to cure it.” What is hell then? What is the point of the cross? What does the Bible mean when it says the Son became our sin, and then was crushed by the Father? What do verses like Revelation 21:8 mean that say all liars will have their part in a lake of fire? Is Young saying that a time of trial on earth for sin acts as atonement for it? What does 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 means when it says:
"…[The] Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire, dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power.”
In Acts 5:1-1 God killed Ananias and Sapphira for telling one lie. Is that simply sin punishing itself, or God punishing sin? Young may believe in and present a god who has no desire to punish sin or distribute justice, but he is not at all worshipping the God of the scriptures.
