Back to the Shack!

I had a wonderful experience with my daughter last Sunday evening. She invited me to a "musical event" at her church, The Odes of Solomon. Now, if you are like me, you may be saying, "What are the Odes of Solomon?" It seems that they are some of the earliest known hymns of the church. They were likely "sung" by Jewish Christians in the area of Antioch (where the term Christian was first used) somewhere between 25 -120 A.D, and written during a time of intense persecution. They were dedicated to Solomon who lived in the 10th century B.C. These Odes were re-discovered in a Syriac manuscript in 1909, and have been translated into many modern languages. There are 42 Christian hymns, which were most probably chanted at sunrise on Sunday mornings when Christians met in each others homes.This hymnal is being introduced to us in this time via a website, www.theodesproject.com, and by way of visits to churches like The Orchard, in Arlington Heights. Responsively (between worship leader, soloists, choir and congregation) we had the opportunity to sing words of encouragement, worship, and truth that Jewish Christians would have been singing almost two thousand years ago. I admit I felt goosebumps cover my arms, realizing I was experiencing something that believers, who potentially lived during the time of Christ's earthly ministry, had. These were people who may have walked with Christ, served along side of Him and watched Him suffer, die, and be resurrected. I felt as though a cord of unity had been stretched across time, linking me to them. Hearing echos of those believers, singing truths found in scripture made me realize that we have been given another window into the hearts of those early Christians. We are told in Luke 1, Phil. 2:6-11, I Tim. 3:16, Rev. 4:11; 5:9-10, and 12-13 that they were known to produce "sacred songs" which they spoke to one another, by which they gave thanks; making melody in their hearts. A joyous experience of worship and expression of truth, but what does it have to do with The Shack?

How can we know if, and what God has spoken to man? From the first recorded words of scripture, the topic of revelation (or how we can know about God), became important. Few doctrines bear more vital scrutiny than this, because it centers on how God chose to reveal Himself to humanity. If God exists, and has spoken, who wouldn't want to know what He said? As we sang I heard those echo's of scriptural truth that have held strong throughout time, and are present in hymns and the Bible today. Christians have been known as "being a people of the book, people who cling to the Scripture as the revealed word of God," says Tim Challies. It pertains to this discussion because the topic of revelation is also a strong thread running visibly throughout The Shack.

There has been an orthodox Judeo-Christian view that there is only one source of revelation to man kind, and that is the infallible and inspired Word of God, the Bible. In the Scriptures, the questions of "how then must we be saved?", and "how then shall we live?" are revealed to us. Challies says a good place to begin this discussion is by examining what it says about itself. He gives us three passages to assist in that discovery.

The Bible says that it is unique and sufficient. In 2 Timothy 3:16-17) we are told that "All scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work". Psalm 19:7 speaks of the Word of God being powerful and perfect. Additionally, Revelation 22:18, 19 states that the Scriptural canon is complete. These passages clearly show that the Bible doesn't place itself as one of many important revelations to man, but says that it is the preeminent source of God's truth. While you may or may not believe this, the point is that this has been declared by Christians from the beginning of the faith. Does The Shack support this time honored view?

Challies helps us understand the importance of the Bible to us by discussing the purpose of mediation in God's revelation to man. Mediation is not an unfamiliar idea to us today. From attempts to come to consensus in disagreements like divorce, or contract disputes, to hammering out pre-nuptual contracts between wealthy couples, we know that people often need a mediator to help them communicate and reach agreement with one another. Why is this concept central to Scripture? Communion with a completely Holy God and His created and loved ones was no small thing. Because of Adam's disobedience to God, told in Genesis, a barrier was created between them. Disobedience broke their completely harmonious fellowship. This brokenness has marked human history ever since. It has also meant that man no longer has had "im-mediate" communication with God. Now a mediator was needed in order for them to communicate. Since those first acts of disobedience, sin prohibits such personal communication, so God has given us the Bible to communicate to us how we can know Him, and how we should live. How does that view compare to William Young's portrayal of revelation?

Young writes (page 197) that "the Bible doesn't teach you to follow rules". Later (pages 202- 206), Papa says to Mack, "I have no expectations of you, so you've never disappointed me." Clearly Young's Papa doesn't help us know how to live or even have a standard for our behavior. If God doesn't reveal a explanation of how He wants to restore what has been lost, we are left to wander aimlessly looking for our own answers. Bluntly, looking at the world around us, we have NOT been so successful at finding answers to the problems that plague us internally, and externally, have we? If God doesn't give us wisdom as to what a spiritually healthy life looks like, we are again left to our own opinions about what that Christian character might be. Rather than promoting a independent, self-sufficient life, I am not denying what the Bible does says about our union with Christ alone (relationship with Him) being what allows us to live out that Christian character, from the inside out. The Bible affirms that knowing how to live comes by way of receiving eternal life. We receive this eternal life through placing our trust in Jesus, who says of Himself, "I am the way, the truth, and the life, no one comes to the Father but through Me." (John 14:6). It is just that the Bible is God's story, showing us the truth in these matters as a plumb line by which to measure human experience. It isn't relationship or revelation, take your pick. It's God's revelation shows us what God has revealed about how to have relationship and thereby be saved; it's both!

Sarayu (page 195) says, "You will learn to hear my thoughts in yours. You might see me in a piece of art, or music, or silence, or through people, or in Creation, or in your joy and sorrow. My ability to communicate is limitless, living and transforming, and it will always be tuned to Papa's goodness and love. And you will hear and see me in the Bible in fresh ways. Just don't look for rules and principles; look for relationship - a way of coming to be with us" (page 198). Challies says that "Young consistently downplays Scripture at the expense of personal experience. What Young indicates in The Shack is that we must expect God to reveal Himself to us in unmediated ways. God will reveal Himself to us in the Scripture, but only as one way out of many. Scripture is not given the uniqueness that it demands of itself." While God may use all of the ways Sarayu speaks of, and more, to remind us of the Father's imprint upon His creation and creatures, I feel that without the authoritative Word of God, we are subject to every "whim" that blows across our pathways. The Bible is our standard and mirror for truth.

Finally, Challies contends that most references to the Scripture in The Shack speak of abuses and are negative in tone, rather than affirmations of it's preeminent position as God's means of communicating truth to us. In my previous post I mentioned other references to the Bible being "guilt edged" (a play on the gilted pages of more expensive Bibles), and to Mack's seminary education as one that depreciates the Bible as God's revelation of truth to us today. Young states that, "God's voice had been reduced to paper, and even that paper had to be moderated and deciphered by the proper authorities and intellects. It seemed that direct communication with God was something exclusively for the ancients and uncivilized, while educated Westerners' access to God was mediated and controlled by the intelligentsia. Nobody wanted God in a box, just a book." (pages 65-66) Even though, some doctrines are deep and complicated, God's message of redemption, and life, found in the Bible is to be read straightforwardly, and is not complicated. It is plain, so that any seeking heart can discover it.

So, does William Young give the Scripture the position of authority and uniqueness that they give themselves or that Christians have accorded them over the centuries? Does he recognize the power, completeness and sufficiency of God's Word? An honest reading of The Shack answers a resounding "NO!". You may like Young as an author of fiction, but as a theologian, he's no guide around which to frame your thinking.