A coworker insisted that I read “The Cabin.” He didn’t give me many details about the book, but he said it revealed God’s grace in personal tragedy. After a few false starts, I was finally able to get the book started.

Not being a huge fan of Christian novels, I was immediately disappointed, but forced myself to read on. I must confess that I was entertained by Young’s prose, as he gave vivid details that helped me visualize the story. His style eventually became a distraction as I started thinking about his style and lost focus on his message. However, all authors have their own distinctive style and I must leave it at that. In chapter 7 he became CS “Lewisesque” and transformed our hero’s (Mark) reality into a fantasy land. Ugh…, Lord of the Rings here we go. (I enjoyed the movies, but I just couldn’t hang out with the books.)

If you’ve ever read CS Lewis, “The Chronicles of Narnia” or John Bunyan’s “Pilgrim’s Progress,” you’ll understand how the authors use metaphor to illustrate the character and attributes of God. Young uses a contemporary metaphor to reveal God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. He lets the dynamics of a family relationship describe the trinity. The reader can immediately identify the three Persons of the Godhead by the roles Young has assigned them. I admit that God chose me as an Aunt Jemima in the beginning. However, “God” explained that “She” appeared in the form that Mark needed most, namely a doting mother. Jesus was portrayed as a good handy fisher boy. I never realized the Holy Spirit.

Young’s entertainment aside, I began to analyze his theology and easily concluded that Young believes in classical Pelagianism. Wikipedia defines Pelagianism as “the belief that original sin did not taint human nature and that the mortal will is still capable of choosing good or evil without divine help. Therefore, Adam’s sin was giving an evil example to his offspring, but his actions did not. they have the other consequences imputed to original sin. Pelagianism sees the role of Jesus as a good example for the rest of humanity (thus counteracting Adam’s bad example). In short, humanity has full control and full responsibility for their own salvation in addition to full responsibility for every sin. According to the Pelagian doctrine, because humanity does not require God’s grace for salvation (beyond the creation of the will), the execution of Jesus is devoid of the redemptive quality attributed to it by orthodox Christian theology.”

Unfortunately, Young in his attempt to personalize the Godhead did so at the expense of God’s sovereignty. Young’s god is similar to the one theorized by Pelagius. God created the world and sits and watches life as it unfolds, intervening only occasionally, but doing so so as not to interfere with man’s so-called “free will.” God often resists the temptation to intervene because of his love for his creatures. This is not unlike a watchmaker winding a watch, placing it on the mantel, and watching time go by. The only task of the watchmaker is to wind it from time to time.

Young’s casual approach to illustrating the sovereign God described in the Bible leads me to believe that he was influenced by Harold S. Kushner’s book, “When Bad Things Happen to Good People.” This little book was published in the early 1980s and was a bestseller. In it, Kushner shattered the omnipotence and omniscience of God. Kushner said, “If God can’t make my disease go away, what good is it? Who needs it? God doesn’t want you to be sick or crippled. He didn’t make you have this problem and he doesn’t want it.” he wants you to keep having it, but he can’t make it go away. That is something that is too difficult even for God.” Of course, I have no idea if Young ever read Kushner, but the thought crossed my mind. I will give Young high marks for his depiction of the main character’s encounter with the judge. Young captured the key cause of our character’s ongoing remorse and pondered his personal loss. Our hero blamed God for his loss and was angry at God for not intervening. People who gossip and complain about how life has “dealt them a bad hand of cards” is a stab at God.

In my counseling ministry, most people who are looking for solutions to their problems are not happy because God didn’t give them a better rest. Whether it’s a better parenting set or a more loving and responsible spouse, counselees are disappointed in God because he hasn’t given them a problem-free life. They don’t see the point of suffering, and they certainly don’t appreciate Romans 8:28-29: “And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to his purpose. For those whom he foreknew, he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.” How can “all things work together for God to those who love God? ?” I believe that trials and tribulations (“things”) help us to become more like Christ in our character and behavior.

I have met several people who have read or are reading The Shack. Young’s talent has captured the minds of many and some are fascinated by her book. It is unfortunate that they are left with an image of God and not of the scriptures. For example, why did God create Pharaoh out of Egypt? What was the purpose of the book of Job? How did Judas Iscariot glorify God? What is Romans chapter 9 talking about? The scriptures are full of themes and illustrations that demonstrate the power of God. These events show his attributes and how they interact to create his perfect plan.

For whatever reason, Young seeks to feminize the Godhead by making two of the persons of the trinity female. On page 93, Dad says, “I’m neither a man nor a woman.” That’s a gross exaggeration, especially when you consider that of all the apparitions of a deity to a human being, or to a divine revelation in the Bible (known as Theophany for God’s appearance and Christophany for Christ), not one is female. If God made man in his own image, why was Adam created a man? Why not something else?

So why did Young want God to appear as a woman? It is possible that by exposing him as a missionary, Young wanted to introduce diversity; whether in gender, race or culture. It is also possible that he wanted humanity to identify more with God if Young could make God seem more human. If God used Christ’s appearance in the Bible as a Middle Eastern man to build his bridge, why not introduce African and Oriental women to enhance identification? Let’s not fool ourselves. At least when CS Lewis created the lion, Aslan, to personify Christ, the reader of Lewis had no trouble understanding the comparison of a lion to Christ.

My biggest problem is Young’s lack of understanding of sin, salvation, and the Gospel message. Let me quote on page 225, Dad says, “I have forgiven all humans for their sins against me, but only some choose a relationship.” And later, “When you forgive someone, you certainly release him from judgment.”

So what dooms a person to eternal damnation? In context, Young is apparently teaching that it is the lack of a relationship that sends a person to hell. If this is true, then a relationship can only exist when one believes. So if a person does not believe, then it must be the sin of unbelief that condemns the man.

The Puritan John Owen (1616-1683) asked the following question: “For whom did Christ die?”

1. All the sins of all men. 2. All the sins of some men, or 3. Some of the sins of all men.

In which case it can be said: 1. If the latter is true, all men have some sins to answer for, and thus no one is saved. 2. That if the second is true, then Christ suffered for all the sins of all the elect in the whole world. 3. But if the former is the case, why are not all men free from the punishment due to their sins?

Some may reply, “Out of disbelief (or lack of relationship).” I would ask, is this unbelief (ie, lack of relationship according to Young) a sin, or is it not? If it is, then Christ suffered the penalty for it, or He did not. If he did, why should that sin condemn them more than their other sins for which Christ died? If he didn’t, he didn’t die for all his sins.”

The Bible clearly teaches that grace is what saves and uses faith as the means. Ephesians 2:8-9 teaches that even faith is a gift from God so we cannot boast. Furthermore, Young’s theology leaves no room for the doctrine of Justification by faith. How is a person declared righteous before God? Young needs a clear reading of the account of Abraham in Romans.

Overall, The Shack is an entertaining read and I’d put it on a shelf next to the genre of Christian romance novels my oldest son refers to as “Christian smut.” It certainly belongs nowhere near Pilgrim’s Progress or anywhere near any good book on the nature of God.

If one is looking for a solid, biblically based book on dealing with personal suffering, I highly recommend Jerry Bridges’ book, “Trusting in God: Even When Life Hurts.” Bridges shows how we must learn about God’s sovereignty, wisdom, and love if we want to know him better. You won’t be disappointed.