The Shack—Eat the Meat, Throw Away the Bones

I never paid any attention to The Shack until a friend mentioned it to me not long ago. The book came up in the context of a prison ministry that he and his wife lead each Sunday. He said that the prisoners love the “The Shack” because almost all of them can relate to the concept of a “Great Sadness” on the inside, and many of them come from broken homes. Certainly they all struggle with issues of guilt and forgiveness. My friend said that when they read “The Shack,” they find hope for reconciliation and healing of relationships that today seem irretrievably broken.

I mention that simply to remark that I am not surprised that so many people have read the book and found hope in it. I tend to think that since it is a novel, they don’t give it any great theological weight. That is, they take from it a general message regarding a God who is “especially fond of them” and the possibility of forgiveness through Christ. The rest of it is, so to speak, just part of the “crazy dream” and doesn’t seem to matter very much. It’s like they say about eating fish. Eat the meat, throw away the bones.

That only works up to a point. It’s the bones that give structure to the fish. Without the bones in the first place, there would be no fish at all. It’s possible to say, “This is a novel. It’s not about theology,” but every a cursory reading of the book shows that that isn’t true. Almost every word “Papa” says is a theological statement of some kind of other—except for random comments such as the warning about not eating too many greens or you will end up with the trots.

Today I ate lunch with a pastor whose theological acumen I hold in high regard. I was a bit surprised when he told me that he had no particular problems with the way the Trinity is portrayed in the book. I think he sees it as part of a dream and therefore not to be taken seriously. He said that while he would not endorse the book, he understands why so many people (including many Christians) are reading it and have found it helpful. I suppose that’s about where I come out on “The Shack." 

In any case, the reading public has spoken—loudly. This book speaks in a heart language that millions of people can understand. Do I wish it had better theology? Yes, but at the same time I am happy for those who read it and are genuinely drawn closer to God. If you read “The Shack” as a story and nothing more, you can enjoy it on its own terms, and you may even find yourself profoundly moved.

So where are we at the end of all this? Don’t believe every word that “Papa” says in “The Shack.” I would not be honest if I didn’t give that warning. Some of it—maybe even a lot of it—is good. Some is speculative. Some of it is plainly wrong. If you read the book and enjoy it, you needn’t feel guilty. It’s a novel, after all. Eat the meat, throw away the bones. Read “The Shack” with discernment. The following advice applies to every book we read, every sermon we hear, everything we find on the Internet, and every TV show or movie we watch. “Don’t be gullible. Check out everything, and keep only what’s good. Throw out anything tainted with evil” (1 Thessalonians 5:21-22 The Message). If you want to know how to separate the meat from the bones, reading the Bible would be a good place to start.

Visitor Comments:

July 18, 2008, 1:01 AM Dale says:
	Hi Ray Thanks for your comments on The Shack. I do have a question for you though. As you stated: “Some of it is plainly wrong”. How does the verse “A little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough” Gal 5:9 apply in a case like this? Many reviewers have stated that they would not recommend this book to Biblical novices since they wouldn’t be able to seperate out the truth from the error. You can certainly tell people to “Eat the meat and throw away the bones” but what if the meat is poisoned or they choke on the bones. Regards Dale
July 18, 2008, 6:12 AM Ray Pritchard says:
	Dale, you raise a good point. I am not trying to stop anyone from reading “The Shack.” That would be a pointless endeavor on my part. People vote with their pocketbooks. And in this case, they have already voted. People like the book, including many Christians. As I said in the beginning, I enjoyed the book more than I thought I would, though I was bothered by a lot of things I read. Regarding Galatians 5:9 and its warning about how doctrinal error spreads, the very next verse says, “I am trusting the Lord to keep you from false teaching.” Even Paul could not guarantee the Galatians would not follow the Judaizers. It is the Lord who who must give his people discernment. I don’t want to stop anyone from reading the book. I don’t have that sort of power anyway. Nor do I wish to be so negative that I deny the reality that many Christians have read the book and been encouraged. In a case like this, I decided to admit the obvious—that many people like the book—and simply end with a call for discernment. Will that be enough? Only if verse 10 is true—that the Lord will protect his people. Ray
July 18, 2008, 9:26 AM Helen says:
	Pastor Ray, I’ve enjoyed your series on The Shack. Like you, I enjoyed the book more than I thought I would. One thing that moved me is how, in this crazy dream, God is a group of people who are cheerful and fun and funny, yet not in an insensitive way that minimizes the real pain of others. They’re the sort of people you feel better just from being around even if your life circumstances didn’t actually change. You go away more able to hold onto hope. This isn’t necessarily because of the content of what they said to you. It’s more that it’s hard to forget what’s fun and good about life when you’re around them. Since a number of humans have this ability to lift the spirits of others who spend time with them it must have come from God. I really like that the author portrayed God this way. A number of years ago I noticed Isaiah 42:3, how Jesus wouldn’t crush a bruised reed or snuff out a smoldering candle wick. (Matthew later quotes this passage as referring to Jesus) To me this says something huge about God’s approach to people who need gentleness (God of course knows who they are) which I think is often overlooked in the church. Perhaps part of the power of The Shack is that the author picked up on the idea in that one verse. I don’t think I’ve ever heard a sermon on it or read a book about it. I just stumbled across it one day and thought it was awesome.
July 18, 2008, 12:39 PM James says:
	Always gotta ruin theological arguments with the contexts of verses! What do you think about the opinion of those who’ve declared “The Shack” as heretical? Do they think books like this should be preached against? I personally don’t have a lot of issues with it, and definitely not any more than I have with a lot of “Christian” novels.
July 18, 2008, 2:53 PM Dale Thompson says:
	Hi Ray I guess I am trying to get a good grasp on the nature of theological error and its effects. Someone I was interacting with on “The Shack” made this statement: “Every Christian book on every Christian bookshelf has error, some more than others, but it’s all a shade of grey.” I suppose I agree with them to a certain extent since I believe only the original autographs of the scriptures are absolutely inerrant. But then I read a quote like this from Dr. Harry Ironside: “Error is like leaven, of which we read, ‘ A little leaven leaventh the whole lump.’ Truth mixed with error is equivalent to all error, except that it is more innocent looking and, therefore, more dangerous. God hates such a mixture! Any error, or any truth-and-error mixture, calls for definite exposure and repudiation. To condone such is to be unfaithful to God and His Word and treacherous to imperiled souls for whom Christ died.” (quoted in The Berean Call, April 2008). So I am wrestling with all this right now and endeavoring to come to a Godly conclusion. I’m not expecting you to be the “Censor Par Excellence” dictating to people what they can and cannot read. I also don’t believe that popularity necessarily correlates with profitableness. Obviously the book has struck a chord with people in helping them gain an understanding and appreciation of love, mercy, forgiveness, hope, etc. that they didn’t have before. There just seems to me to be a tradeoff here that is worrisome. As for Paul’s confidence in the Lord in regard to the Galatian church I would agree. “Unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain. Unless the LORD watches over the city, the guards stand watch in vain.” Psalm 127:1 His confidence in the Lord did not stop him from writing and warning them though. Regards Dale
July 18, 2008, 3:25 PM Ray Pritchard says:
	James, I have no beef with anyone who thinks “The Shack” is heretical. I have been browsing the Internet reading various comments about the book and they are literally all over the place. A friend wrote me and said that he had mixed feelings about the book, and I think that sums up my thoughts as well. It’s a challenge to evaluate a novel that is built upon a dream sequence. It’s not the same thing as a nonfiction book. I share many of the concerns expressed by others, including the review by Tim Challies that I linked to in my first blog entry. I don’t endorse or recommend “The Shack.” My own preference is to offer some perspective to those who may read it. Ray
July 18, 2008, 3:30 PM Ray Pritchard says:
	Dale, I am grateful to you for your comments and to everyone who has written an analysis of the book. When a book is as popular as “The Shack,” we need people who will do some theological investigation to help the rest of us who read it. You are right about the need to offer warnings to others. We all need discernment about what we read and watch. I hope that my comments this week have helped a little bit in that direction. Ray
July 21, 2008, 3:37 PM Clar Lyn says:
	If anyone is interested, the author himself gave a 3-part interview June 16, 17, 18 if you care to audio podcast it at www.haventoday.org You’re right about the people have spoken....I believe it is now #1 on NY Times bestsellers list for 8 weeks now!
July 23, 2008, 3:05 PM ronjfisher says:
	I have read all your statements and responses and greatly appreciate your sensitivity to the broad range of perspectives. I’m personally very relaxed about theolgy when I read a novel. The Shack really gripped me emotionally and helped me better appreciate the concept of the Trinity. It has been a struggle to think of the HS as a person, but not anymore. Thanks for not making me feel guilty! Ron
July 23, 2008, 3:31 PM Owen says:
	In the library of a church we’ve been attending the past couple of months is a sign that reads: “The only infallible book in the Library is the Bible. Read with care."
July 24, 2008, 2:05 AM Dale says:
	Hi Ray Ben Witherington has just posted a balanced review on The Shack at his blog that you might be interested in. http://benwitherington.blogspot.com/ I’m just about done reading the book myself though I can’t say my opinion has changed much. I have been able to catch most of your sessions here at Cannon Beach this week and want to thank you again for your ministry. You have definitely become one of my favorite speakers that we bring here. I also ordered a copy of your book on Ecclesiastes off of an Amazon used book seller. I am looking forward to reading it. Regards Dale
July 25, 2008, 7:40 PM Ray Pritchard says:
	Clar Lyn, thanks for the link to the Haven broadcasts. Always good to hear what the author has to say about his own book. Ron, no need to feel guilty for reading “The Shack.” I have mixed feelings about it as I indicated in my review. But as you said, it’s a novel and we need to factor that into our evaluation. Owen, I love that statement from the church library. We ought always to read with care. Only the Bible is infallible. Dale, thanks for your kind words about my ministry this week at Cannon Beach. I have thoroughly enjoyed being here. I really liked Ben Witherington’s review. He delved into the theology of the Trinity better than any other review I’ve read. His analysis was very helpful. Ray
August 9, 2008, 11:47 PM Kristin Kmduus@yahoo.com says:
	Hi Pastor Ray, I am thrilled that you are open to discussion of “The Shack.” I don’t typically read fiction and I NEVER read ‘Christian’ fiction. It always seems poorly written. I read “The Shack” because so many of my friends were reading it and I figured that to have an honest opinion I needed to read it myself. I thought it was BEAUTIFULLY poetic. A really good read. I couldn’t put it down — finished it in a couple of hours while sick in bed. Certainly the author took liberties but I, too, looked at it as a weird dream one might have. I did, however, have a particular moment that bugged my spirit. I can’t remember the exact page but Papa explains that Jesus is really just the “first” person to live a fully surrendered life and that we all have the potential to live as He did. My question is this, does that not smack of the New Age belief of all of us being divine? Surely, Jesus, who while He was fully human lived as more than surrendered since He was also God in the flesh. Was I reading correctly that the author of ‘The Shack’ seems to state we can all be God-like? Kristin Duus
August 12, 2008, 4:52 PM Ray Pritchard says:
	Kristin, that whole section of the novel caught my eye also. Part of the problem with “The Shack” is that when you come to a section like that, you don’t know exactly how to evaluate it because, after all, it’s a work of fiction. Some people would read that and say, “It means that we have the power of Christ available to us today,” which is very true. Others would read it more in a New Age fashion. I certainly think that Jesus is much more than the first person to live a “fully surrendered” life. Come to think of it, I’m not sure what that statement is supposed to imply. He was just “fully surrendered,” he was the eternal God incarnate as a man. There is nothing in our experience that can parallel that. I don’t think any of us have the “potential” to literally be like Jesus in this world. After all, we are sinners—and he was not. But we can discover his power working through us every day. I can’t speak for the novel or its author, but I do gladly affirm that Philippians 4:13 is true for us today.
November 17, 2008, 11:47 PM Kay says:
	I read it. I thought it was a little sick! Only a sick person would write a book about a little girl and a pervert. I guess I wasn’t impressed at all. We see enough of this kind of garbage on the news without having to make up some sick story of a little girl serial killer. Who sits and writes about things like this?...Even if it does try to bring some spiritual meaning, there are plenty of other ways of doing this than making God out to be a female which He is clearly NOT!