Dr Paul Allen

A little over ten years ago, the book The Shack became an unexpected best-seller, sparking debate and garnering appreciation from across the evangelical landscape. Though originally written for the author’s children and copied at Kinko’s, the book reached number one on the New York Times fiction best-seller list after its release. It hit number one again in 2017 after a major motion picture was released based on the book. The themes of the book are heavy, at times harrowing, and inescapably theological, though they are presented in such a way that the reader can forget it is indeed a work of theology. The theological themes touched on include the character of the church, the problem of evil (theodicy), the nature of revelation, the depiction of God, and our understanding of the Trinity.  I want to speak to an element of this last theme because the novel assumes something we are all tempted to assume: in reference to God, ”Father” is ultimately a metaphor and, as such, can be manipulate

It’s hardly theological novelty or historical oddity to suggest we should be wary of presenting the immaterial God in physical form. This was the point of my recent article on The Shack movie in which I expressed my concern that its portrayal of God the Father and God the Holy Spirit is a violation of the second commandment. I was surprised by the scope and tone of the response. Yet amid many retorts and accusations, I received one thoughtful question from at least a hundred people: What about Narnia ? If it is wrong to portray God the Father as the human Papa, isn’t it equally wrong to portray God the Son as the lion Aslan ? This is a very good question and I am glad to answer it. In what follows I want to tell why Papa of The Shack is not Aslan of Narnia. I will argue they are not the same in three key ways: they are from different genres of literature, portray different characters, and teach different messages. Different Genres The first key difference between The Shack and

The publishing world sees very few books reach blockbuster status, but William Paul Young’s The Shack has now exceeded even that. The book, originally self-published by Young and two friends, has now sold more than 10 million copies and has been translated into over thirty languages. It is now one of the best-selling paperback books of all time, and its readers are enthusiastic. According to Young, the book was originally written for his own children. In essence, it can be described as a narrative theodicy — an attempt to answer the question of evil and the character of God by means of a story. In this story, the main character is grieving the brutal kidnapping and murder of his seven-year-old daughter when he receives what turns out to be a summons from God to meet him in the very shack where the man’s daughter had been murdered. In the shack, “Mack” meets the divine Trinity as “Papa,” an African-American woman; Jesus , a Jewish carpenter; and “ Sarayu ,” an Asian woman who is

The Shack Movie is not another C.S. Lewis ’ Narnia. Several well-meaning friends have expressed the idea that The Shack is no different than the very creative Narnia series by C.S. Lewis. Again, we turn to the writing of Tim Challies where in his blog “ Why Papa of The Shack Is not Aslan of Narnia. ” He suggests three reasons why the two are not the same: different genres (allegorical fiction vs didactic fiction), different persons ( Jesus vs God the Father , God the Son and God the Holy Spirit ), and different messages (Aslan is like Jesus vs Papa is God). Challies wraps up his blog with the following: I have argued on three grounds that Papa of The Shack is not Aslan of Narnia. They appear in different genres of literature, represent different characters, and teach different messages. Narnia is an allegorical tale; The Shack is didactic fiction. Aslan is a Christ-like figure from a parallel world and its fabricated mythology; Papa is God the Father in the real-world and

The day  The Shack  sold its hundred thousandth copy, it became likely there would be a movie adaption. The day it sold its millionth, it became practically guaranteed. And, sure enough, it comes to theaters, starring Sam Worthington , Octavia Spencer , and Tim McGraw . I am sure that watching and reviewing  The Shack  would be an unwise and even sinful spiritual decision. For that reasonI will not be seeing or reviewing  The Shack . Let me explain why. The Shack in Brief I trust you are familiar with  The Shack , the book that came from nowhere to sell more than twenty million copies. It is the story of Mack, a man who has suffered a terrible tragedy and whose faith has been left in tatters. But then he receives an unexpected invitation to return to the scene where that tragedy unfolded.  In a little shack, he encounters Father, Son, and Holy Spirit , each in human form—Papa, an African-American woman, Son, a middle-aged Middle-Eastern man, and Holy Spirit , an eclectic

With the recent launch of  The Shack  movie, we are reminded of a whole mix of theological questions raised by the novel, and the problems of projecting the divine onto a screen. One of the lead characters in the book, for example, is a woman named Papa, who plays the role of God the Father , and her character reignites questions over divine identity and gender language. “I am neither male nor female,” Papa self-discloses in the novel, “even though both genders are derived from my nature. If I choose to  appear  to you as a man or woman, it’s because I love you. For me to appear to you as a woman and suggest you call me Papa is simply to mix metaphors, to help you keep from falling so easily back into your religious conditioning.” Religious conditioning in this context points a finger at the default of using predominantly male metaphors for God. When it comes to the divine titles for God, should we be more inclusive and gender-blended? Coincidentally, a student in the Nethe