The Shack

I finished reading The Shack last Sunday and I've been trying to get around to blogging about it ever since. I was skeptical from the start. I'm not into Christian fiction; it's usually too cheesy and poorly written. (I'm a snob, OK?) Also, The Shack seemed a little too allegorical for my literary tastes; I like a story with meaning, not meaning with a story. Even if I agree with a story's meaning I want the meaning to flow naturally from the story, not have characters and events forced on it to reinforce it. Truth doesn't need to be coerced. But my parents and my grandma like The Shack and I got it for Christmas, so I decided to read it—if nothing else, to see what all the fuss was about.

Well my worst fears were confirmed, not surprisingly. I wasn't impressed with the writing and often found the story a little cheesy and contrived to fit a specific meaning. Since I expected that coming in I tried my best to set aside my pathetically haughty disdain (disdain is too strong a word, I just liked the phrase pathetically haughty disdain). I decided not to be a snooty, pretentious piece-of-work, and instead try to be honest and non-combative. (Points for trying?)

Here's what I found:
I pretty much agree with the ideas behind the picture of God that William Paul Young creates. God is a god of love and a relational being. He is not limited by our ideas and misconceptions. He cares for us always and lives in a way that is wholly outside our comprehension. He is all-knowing, all-loving, and infinitely-gracious; yet he has chosen to let humanity make choices and mistakes for themselves. I like the broadness of God's love and his ability to relate and feel with people.

The book helped me think about God's love for people and how he relates with them and with himself. It pushed me to take an honest look at suffering and what it means and doesn't mean. That is never a bad thing.

Also, no one warned me that the little girl who died in the book, Missy, was a Melissa Anne like me, spelled the same way—that got my attention. Especially since I have not experienced any major tragedies in my life, it was important to stop and think what if this was me or what if this was my child. Despite my reservations about The Shack, it tackles serious issues and questions that everyone—really, everyone—has to face (or suppress) in life.

What's missing from the book? The story did not portray God's justice, righteous anger, or grief at our sin. People don't like to think of God's justice and anger, but those characteristics are just as true as his love. The book shows a God who is sorry for our pain—and that's true—but it's not the same as being grieved by our choices. Perhaps it was just the situation that the book portrayed; God's love was more relevant and truthful to the situation than some of his other attributes. Maybe, but I'm still skeptical. If God is just, he's just all the time; if he loves, he loves all the time. It's bold to take a stab at tough questions like God's role in our suffering. I seem to struggle more with how God can be wholly-loving and wholly-just at the same time—and the book didn't deal with that question.

There were times that seemed too universalist, too it's-OK-everyone's-cool-with-God-in-the-end. It said that the only way to know God was to have a relationship with Jesus which is true, but there were parts that implied something else. I don't think everyone needs to be a Christian, church-going, poster child, but I think it would be very difficult to come to know Christ as God through another belief system. Lack of clarity made the book's message seem a little wishy-washy at times.

That's my quick, semi-educated analysis. All in all, an interesting book. It made me think, reflect, evaluate, and question.