Posted on 07/14/2009 11:41:13 PM PDT by Quix
The PURPOSE and FOCUS in THE SHACK
was
NOT
to illustrate God’s authority—though actually—it did quite Biblically and quite well, imho.
However, for authoritarIANs, I can see where the authority fix was lacking to their standards.
In my research on religiosity, authoritaRIANS were NOT the most intrinsically, initimately related to God NOR were they the most robustly and authentically Christian. They tended to be much more EXTRINSICS.
In terms of religiosity—the folks who are MOST biggoted, narrow, rigid, hostile, angry, brittle, abusive, etc. by far are those who are:
INDISCRIMMINANTLY ANTI-RELIGIOUS . . . i.e. atheists, agnostics etc.
Those who are NEXT most biggoted, narrow, rigid, hostile, angry, brittle, abusive, etc. but significantly less
are the
EXTRINSIC religionists . . . who also happen to be the most authoritarian in their values, lifestyles, priorities. They put religion on as a coat for appearances, for business etc.
The folks who are the LEAST biggoted, narrow, rigid, hostile, angry, brittle, abusive, etc. . . . different from the most by at least 2 standard deviations on average . . . are the
INTRINSIC RELIGIONISTS. These are the folks who have God in their hearts and integrate Him into every area and decision of their lives.
Guess who make the best parents with children excelling the most and the least in trouble.
authoritaTIVE parents.
AuthoritaRIAN parents are typically among the worst. They generate the most rebellion because they are heavily into DISCIPLINE WITHOUT RELATIONSHIP.
The author of THE SHACK rightly emphasized RELATIONSHIP in his book to his children. That works BEST with God Almighty, too.
God is not into coerced, demanded, puppet, robot relationships with His children.
CHRIST DIED THAT WE MIGHT BE FRIENDS OF GOD; JOINT HEIRS.
No, I didn't.
To: All; Dr. Eckleburg; HarleyD; GamecockRelated threads:
Popular evangelical novelist takes on "dogmatists" [review of THE SHACK]
Stay Out of ‘The Shack’ [Chuck Colson]
Controversial Book 'The Shack' Touts Growth Amid Sales Slump
18 posted on 07/15/2009 6:00:13 AM PDT by Alex Murphy ("I always longed for repose and quiet" - John Calvin)
Do you think the author’s motive for writing The Shack is evil?
Quix, thanks so much.
= = =
So often, these days, I think about the question Jesus asked in Luke 18,
WHEN THE SON OF MAN RETURNS, WILL HE FIND FAITH ON THE EARTH?
I also think of the parable of the ten virgins. Five were wise, and kept their lamps filled with oil and burning, watching for the Bridegroom. The other five fell asleep.
To be one of the five wise virgins, one must guard against all the worldly distractions that would suck us dry, one must also guard against falling asleep, which is what the five foolish virgins did. [Matthew 25.]
May we stay awake, may we be burning brightly, may we love the LORD totally and unceasingly.
May we overcome till the end, may we be found in Him.
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.
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
I’ve already commented on Colson’s very weak critique above.
I found that he made much ado about nothing. It was not his usual great standard of critique, imho.
It was almost prissy.
almost.
Have you read THE SHACK?
AMEN! AMEN! AMEN!
THX.
Aye aye.
I should have responded by FREEPMAIL.
Sorry. I was wrong.
No, but I was in a book club that did. It seemed a lot of people got something out of it. I considered it heretical and decided not to put such nonsense as three women posing as the Trinity into my brain.
But, that’s me! (No offense to those who have read it.)
I was prepared to be quite hostile to it as heretical when I began it.
I was pleasantly surprised.
I think C.S. Lewis takes more liberties in Narnia than the SHACK does.
There was also a review on Catholic Media Review that said it stronger. I just didn’t post it.
I also got it from a third source — and when three Catholic sources denounce something, all Catholics need to take notice.
BTW, I did pass out the printouts from those sites to the book club. I have since read the other books that they are reading including one that is mostly Christian and does not espouse Catholic beliefs.
I don’t think I’d have chosen Aunt Jemima to be the God figure in a novel of mine.
However, given his emphasis and goal of illustrating God’s nurturing Loving qualities, I don’t have a big problem allowing that literary device.
It worked OK, for me.
Well, I think you know that I’m not all that impressed with Roman Catholic sources, including The Vatican if the latest encyclical is any evidence.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.