Monday, August 11, 2008

Mark Driscoll on "The Shack".....

I found this interesting, and to note, Mark Driscoll hadn't even read the book at the time of this clip......Hmmmmm!!! People just need to get over their boxed view of things and let themselves be loved. In the words of Forrest Gump, "That's all I have to say about that!"

15 comments:

jul said...

I have read 'the Shack' now, and it is quite obvious Mark hasn't...

I think there are some problems with some of the doctrine of the shack, but I appreciated it for making me think and look at what I believe and evaluate it based on Scripture not based on what I've been taught, or traditions of men.

It's painfully obvious that the real problem for Mark and it will be the same for many Christians, is that it doesn't fit in his box, his man made system of theology. And it certainly doesn't support the system of heirarchy that puts food on his table and makes him feel like a big important man.

I don't think the shack was a great book to get your doctrine from, but to tell people not to read it (more like command them) strikes me as arrogant and authoritarian.

The kind of judgements he's making about the book seem to lead me to believe that he considers to have perfect doctrine himself, and anyone who disagrees with him is in danger of heresy. He's also clearly misrepresenting the book on several points, one of which is trying to say that God is portrayed as a goddess, that's ridiculous.

I might disagree with how the author decided to portray God as a woman (or not) but regardless it's obvious the point the author was trying to make is that God is neither male or female but Spirit and we on earth have humanized God by our doctrine, therefore we don't know who God really is. We have trouble as people getting past outward appearances and in the case of God, who is invisible, we often try to wrongly ascribe to him human characteristics in order to understand who he is. The author purposely chose to portray God in the opposite way we normally do, to make a valid point.

Mark and many other pastors don't want people to think or reevaluate what they believe based on Scripture, because they are afraid of losing control over the people. They want people to believe what they tell them, they want power of censorship, they depend on heirarchy to do this. They use fear and guilt and manipulation to accomplish this, making people feel like they are too stupid or in a position of submission so that they won't disagree. Notice he doesn't prove anything well from Scripture, but throws out intimidating big theological words that aren't even in the Bible, using traditions of men to 'prove' his points.

Bino M. said...

I don't draw the doctrine of Trinity from the book Shack And I don't understand why people would try to, when it clearly says it is a work of fiction. I too don't agree that the representation of 'Trinity' in Shack is biblically accurate. But at the same time, I don't think the author intended to create a graven image of God as well. His intention (as I understand) was to present a perfectly loving triune God and to some extend he was successful in that. God is spirit and we can't apply flesh and blood to Him and with our finite mind we can't comprehend the Trinity.

More over, I don't think the essence of the book is about 'Trinity'. To me it presents an understanding, loving, caring and reconciling God.

Matthew Campbell said...

I think Mark was wrong about calling the book goddess worship. The book plainly says the reason for portraying God as a black woman was to show us that God is neither male nor female.

I agree we shouldn't take the Shack as Scripture like some people do. It's a fictional book written by a man. I think people place too much importance on the book. Scripture is our source of truth.

I found truth in the book as well as errors. Somethings in it ticked me off, but when it comes to God's grace and living from the life of Christ, I think the book is dead on. It's funny that people completely ignore those parts and go straight for the "God isn't a black woman" argument.

jul said...

Forgot,we were watching some clips of Adrian Warnock interviewing Mark recently and he mentioned his wife's name is Grace. I just felt God spoke to me to be careful of my attitude about Mark (I don't like many things he teaches), he's still God's child and I believe we can be praying that he comes to know the grace of God initmately in his life and ministry.

jul said...

By the way, that was not aimed at any of you other commenters, wasn't saying any of you had an attitude problem with Mark! I just know that I personally do...

Matthew Campbell said...

hehe I have done the same thing, Julie. Like you said, it's best to be respectful and properly adorn the Gospel of God's Grace. But I really dislike his teachings as well.

lydia said...

Well interesting comments Julie, Matt and Bino! I couldn't resist putting this video up, it frustrated me to see him doing a whole teaching segment on a book he never read nor has a clue what the real meaning or point was! That said, Julie, you are right to refute his thoughts on this and I appreciate your awareness of how you want to be careful of how you speak of Mark. That's one of the themes in the Shack -Mack had some issues to get over with some folks and God helped him do it and reminded him that those people were his children that he loved as well!!!
I think the whole issue with Papa being portrayed as a black woman may have been a purposeful thing on William Youngs part, trying to shake up every ones religion. Ha, he did a good job! No but really, Papa explained to Mack why he saw God/Papa as a black woman. He knew Mack needed a motherly figure, some nuturing, considering his past relationship with his dad of whom he had deep inner turmoil still hanging on. Eventually, he became an old man in the story, after Mack had made peace with his dad. Anyway, God made male and female in HIS image, do we not realize God has both female and male qualities to Him. Anyway, I loved the book, it was never intended to replace preaching or sound doctrine. And I agree with Bino, that the book portrayed a loving reconciling God - in a deeper way than we often see him and many need this awesome refreshing reminder!!!
Out of curiosity Mattl, what was it that ticked you off about the book? If you don't mind sharing on here.

Matthew Campbell said...

Hey Lydia,

The thing that really irked me was certain things that hinted at universalism. Sayings like "judgment isn't about hell, but about righting the wrongs" or something like that. Again, I know Paul said he didn't believe in universalism, but some things in the book seemed to have implied universalism. I do believe God is love. But His grace can only be attained through faith in Jesus Christ. Some people tend to forget that. Only in Christ can we eternally experience God's love and kindness.

I just get upset when people leave the slightest implication of the heresy of the belief that all will be saved in the end. It doesn't do anyone any favors.

silent wings said...

Can I just say that I love listening in ;)

lydia said...

Matt, I guess I didn't really pick up on the insinuated universalism. I guess I read the book knowing not to look for all it's faults, and just enjoyed it for what it was. It sure would be interesting to go back and re-read it and see what I missed! I think the main or even the sole purpose of the book was to go deeper in opening up our hearts and minds to the Love of God!!! I know you know that :) Anyway, thanks for sharing that with me!!

Cirra, glad you are enjoying, have you read the book?

jul said...

Cirra, you can borrow it from me if you haven't read it yet and want to.

Jamie said...

If The Shack is about the trinity then the cross was about a blasphemous carpenter, I guess.
Definition of heresy: anything that disagrees with what someone believes. ;)
The Shack, like the cross, is about love. Some people just don't see it.
Thank God our judgement is behind us! Thank God it's about what Jesus did, not what we do! I'm not pressing on to keep my salvation or to become worthy of it; I'm pressing on to remember everyday what the cross did for me. It killed me so Christ could live in me. It redeemed me! That's what I read in The Shack.
I'm surprised this guy didn't go off on WWJD. The religious right's motto. He couldn't have read the book.
OK, last thought...I actually know someone who wanted The Grapes Of Wrath banned in our school system because of the final scene where the young mother breastfeeds the starving man. Some people have the amazing ability to find error, sin, fault in anything. I think Jesus and the Pharisees is a pretty good example.
Grace changes everything, doesn't it?

lydia said...

Yes indeed it does, grace changes everything.....thanks for your thought RJW, and I agree people are way to quick to find error, sin and fault in anything!! Where is the Christian love anymore??? Well, I suppose if one was able to read the Shack for what it's purpose was, they might find themselves stirred a bit about the beautiful picture of love laced throughout the book!!!!
Much grace to you!!!

silent wings said...

I haven't read the book yet and my sister has it if I want to read it. (Thanks for offering Julie)

lydia said...

Aah, no pressure, just curious. So many good books to read, who has time for them all!!!