Most Helpful Customer Reviews
303 of 362 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
An Unnecessary Book, July 13, 2010
This review is from: Burning Down 'The Shack': How the 'Christian' bestseller is deceiving millions (Paperback)
Having read both The Shack (5 times) and "Burning Down the Shack", I am disappointed at another attempt by self-anointed 'experts' to 'protect' us from false doctrine. As another reviewer has mentioned, Paul Young wrote The Shack as a piece of fiction, not as a new revelation of God. Young's experiences and his grappeling with his faith might have taken him on a different journey than the author of Burning Down the Shack, but where Young succeeds in revealing the love and mercy of God toward man, de Young describes man's instinctive distrust in unearned grace and suggests that the relationship between God and man is Jesus, plus this or Jesus plus that. Essentially we get back to works and earning God's approval under de Young's theology.
It's almost too apparent that de Young seeks to capitalize on Paul Young's success; not by creating a thought-provoking and inspiring book, but by straining gnats in his critique of a superior work. Another biblical scholar - the man who wrote The Message bible, Dr. Eugene Peterson, praises The Shack, as do numerous other pastors. What The Shack does, is it presents an approachable Father; and by bringing hurting people to a point where they can at least hope that God is as loving as The Shack portrays - that He not only knows their circumstances, He's willing to step into them on our behalf - it's at this point that people can feel comfortable enough with God to trust Him with their lives. The Shack has done more to draw people to Christ than any book since the Bible. Where they go from there is a journey of deeper discovery and more sure faith. Conversely, Burning Down the Shack is like a termite, undermining hope and faith and plunging readers back into a failed and ineffective system.
de Young says that The Shack promotes universalism, when the book clearly states that all roads don't lead to Christ. The Shack presents a Jesus who will walk anywhere to find followers, but He doesn't leave them in their sins and false beliefs. De Young says that The Shack trivializes God, but readers of The Shack will not find God letting Mack get away with anything. De Young implies a hierarcy in the Trinity, but if the three members of the God-head walk in complete unity, why would a hierarchy be necessary? de Young is a theologian - a person who has invested his time and energy and money into unlocking the mysteries of God...and ignoring what is so obvious to people who have been inspired by The Shack.
de Young's book reminds me of the story where Christ was performing miracles and casting out demons. The religious leaders claimed that He was able to cast out demons because He himself was one. Other would argue why a demon would turn on himself. The Shack has been demonized when the fruits of this book have produced the absolute opposite of what critics are claiming. While it is true that Young personally leaned towards universal reconciliation - an idea that was the result of his own personal spiritual healing - The Shack was co-written by two other respected theologians who collaborated with Young and were satisfied that the finished product - that book that millions of people have bought and read, presents Jesus is someone we have to accept through repentance and belief in this age to participate in His life.
Finally, the fear and criticism over The Shack theology is that it sounds too good and too simple to be true, thus it must be heresy. Put those chains back on if you must, but I prefer the freedom of being in relationship with Christ to that of a servant. If God is not as loving and merciful and gracious as Papa, why would He sacrifice so much to gain my love; for who am I and what can I really do for God? Theologians like de Young have kept believers so busy serving God and knowing how unworthy and dependent we are, that few of us have had the courage to look beyond God's hands to His face, and to see there the love and acceptance and inheritance He offers. Fear only works as long as we allow our selves to fear God; love keeps us in the relationship.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
203 of 249 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Excellent Expose on Biblical Truths versus the Shack, June 8, 2010
This review is from: Burning Down 'The Shack': How the 'Christian' bestseller is deceiving millions (Paperback)
I am not much of a "formal" book reviewer, but this is a great book that I want others to read, so I'll take my first crack at this.
I am not one who typically reads introductions or forewards in general, but given this book as a gift I was just looking for some general insight into what the author intended to accomplish in this book. However, the information gathered in the introduction is absolutely critical in framing the entire context of the rest of the book: the author has extensive first-hand knowledge/familiarity with the author, and although he takes issue with several key points in the Shack, he makes it very clear that the book is not a personal attack on Paul Young, but rather it is written to correct the distortions of scripture embedded in the Shack. The author sets a clear expectation for his strategy: analyze each chapter of the book, acknowledging what Young did well, what examples from scripture provide context, the scriptural truths that apply, and concluding with the errors found in the Shack.
The author goes through great efforts to scripturally answer many of the difficult questions that readers face throughout life, and does an excellent job explaining the doctrines of Universalism and Universal Reconciliation, and how they contradict scripture, despite their close ties to several scriptural passages. It was very refreshing to see the underlying deceptions of the Shack (either implied or plainly stated) made clear and benchmarked against by scripture. The author explains in detail fundamental, foundational precepts of the Christian faith, and God's plan for giving us access to His grace, mercy, love, and reconciliation, as well as each person's free will of choice to receive it and the resulting outcomes.
Where the author may lose a few readers, is that in addressing some of the more difficult concepts of Chrisitanity (the Trinity, Reconciliation, Love versus Judgement, etc.) he does use some pretty complex words, which may be above the vocabulary for the average reader. The allure of the Shack is that the fiction format, modern-day setting, and simpler word-choice make it easy to relate to the characters and absorb the implied reasonings - but therein also lies the deception of the book. In Burning Down the Shack, the author works very hard to expose those deceptions in a respectful and fact-based manner but it also therefore is not entertainment, but rather a book for learning about the attraction and deception found within the Shack.
I challenge anyone who has read the Shack and found it "enlightening" to now read "Burning Down the Shack" for a counter-view. Then study the scriptures themselves and decide on what God has revealed to us in His Word.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
16 of 20 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Expose on Universal Reconciliation in it's accessible fiction form., July 30, 2011
This review is from: Burning Down 'The Shack': How the 'Christian' bestseller is deceiving millions (Paperback)
Is there a need to refute a work of fiction? We need to keep in mind the power of fiction. Existentialist philosopher Jean Paul Satre had a greater influence through his fiction than his philosophical non-fiction. Scientology originally was the religion in a science fiction novel before the author, Ron L. Hubbard, became founder of one of Hollywood's "in" religions. While most novels, movies, TV-episodes, songs, etc. are created for entertainment, many are used as vehicles to influence thought.
This expose on the Shack by James DeYoung has received many more negative reviews than positive, and some of the negative reviews started, "I haven't read this book and don't think I ever will". DeYoung has dared attack a novel that has had a positive impact on people's lives. Why would he do such a thing? Why is he opposing an inspirational source that helped people into a fresh relationship with God?
Within the introduction is an answer to those questions. James DeYoung and Paul Young (author of the Shack) had founded a Christian think-tank. Then, Young gave a treatise on a theology that he said changed his life, which is "universal reconciliation" (similar but not identical to universalism -- in this view, everybody who goes to hell will be given a chance to repent and turn to Christ [even Satan] and everybody will accept that second chance and be saved). DeYoung later gave a presentation in response, pointing out the errors. A few years later, Young becomes best-selling author of the Shack, and DeYoung, in reading it, discovers the themes of universal reconciliation all through the book.
DeYoung does a fair job. He points out the positives in the book. This is accomplished by giving both positive and negative apologetics -- he states what he believes from the Bible as well as refuting what he disagrees with in universal reconciliation, using The Shack as an illustration. In the end, he answers objections people could raise.
I am an ordained minister and applaud DeYoung's concern for truth, which is as important as love (neither dethrones the other and either is weakened when the other is ignored). I also am a novelist, and like Paul Young mine has some theology woven in it. The reason I'm writing novels is I believe I can influence more people that way than through non-fiction. Should someone give the same scrutiny to my story, I should be thankful, because I want to know where I could be leading people astray.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
