Papa or Yahweh

Remember The Shack? It seemed that our generation of Christians had found its C.S. Lewis, based on the reactions in churches and my school (MV paid a small fortune to bring the great William Young himself to our humble campus in Watsonville). God made sense. The trinity was understandable. Our deepest fears of God were debunked and our selfish hopes confirmed. Jesus was not, in fact, the only way to God. God the Father was also a mother. And black. God wants us to be happy. Enough of this nonsense about considering trials joy and being refined like silver. The nature of the Trinity was equality, not hierarchy. Our postmodern ideals that simplified God into what we wanted— completely human, maternal, tolerant— were theologically confirmed.

Or were they? Young claims he did not intend for his book to be read as theology, but surely he foresaw the impact its publishing would have in Christians' and non-Christians' understanding of the triune God. Sure, he can defend the work by reminding us that he wrote it to give his kids a more understandable picture of God. And therein lies the problem. He reduces God to an oversimplified and completely human god that is on trial.

Young paints the Trinity in utterly unbiblical form. He suggests that there is no headship within the Trinity; hierarchy is nonexistent and unnecessary. However, in 1 Corinthians Paul writes that "the head of Christ is God" (11:3). Young reduces all three Persons of the Trinity to human form; in fact Jesus is the only Member to take on flesh. He portrays God the Father as a mother; though God has no gender, Scripture repeatedly refers to Him in solely masculine terms (Father).

The most dangerous and arguably heretical idea that Young presents is God's willingness to accept Mack's unabashed approach in questioning His ways. Job has similar questions about the problem of evil after tragedy strikes him; in four beautiful, poetic, powerful chapters God declares essentially that He is God and Job is man; Job therefore has no right to question God's ways and authority (Job 38-41). Unlike God's response in Job, Papa's response accepts Mack's question as appropriate and answerable. God is not the defendant; He has nothing to prove. We are on trial; we have been found guilty of sin. If we look onto Jesus as our Savior, we will be found innocent; regardless, we, not God, are up for questioning. God made us. We lack the authority to challenge His sovereignty.

"Who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, 'Why have you made me like this?' " ~Romans 9:20

Only through Jesus' sacrifice are we able to approach the throne of grace with confidence (Hebrews 4:16). And even then, we like Isaiah, ought to throw ourselves prostrate, unworthy to be in His glorious presence:

"Woe is me, for I am undone!

Because I am a man of unclean lips,

And I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips;

For my eyes have seen the King,

The LORD of hosts."

~Isaiah 6:5

Will we choose to know God as the sovereign, holy, divine, triune God of the Bible that offers humanity eternal life through the death of His Son? Or of the jolly, carefree, tolerant, sentimental woman of The Shack that gives offers humanity license to sin?

Take your pick.