Pros and Cons of the Shack
Though I read, and then re-read, The Shack once I heard all the "buzz," and though I intended to write a review (I have over 350 reviews on Amazon.com and have actually made it in the top 200 Amazon reviewers--out of over 5 million), I still have never reviewed The Shack.
Some day...I still may.
My Hesitation
One reason I have resisted is that few folks seem to have a "balanced perspective." They either love it or hate it--totally. And...if you say anything either way, then they all either love you or hate you. I don't like being hated, I guess!
Sovereign Stumbling
Well, today I sovereignly stumbled across a two-part blog that I think does a great job of presenting a fair and balanced review of The Shack.
You can find it here at Cathy Bryant's web site:
wordvessel.blogspot.com
Let me (and her) know what you think. But...be nice.
Pet Peeve
By the way, one of my pet peeves is the typical reaction if someone does disagree with the book. The responder will say, "Oh, that person disagreeing is some ivory-tower academic and out-of-touch intellectual. That's why they don't like the portrayal of God in The Shack."
So, if that is true, then anyone who disagrees with anything is automatically dissed as a non-emotive rationalistic fundamentalist, oh, and unloving, too, of course.
So, if some author denies the virgin birth, or substitutionary atonement, or any other cardinal doctrine of the faith, and then another person disagrees, is the one who disagrees automatically unloving and an ivory-tower academic? Or, are we allowed to lovingly disagree when we believe another author has denied the fundamentals of the faith?
Now, I certainly dislike reviewers who attack another author simply for the sake of attacking. But when someone provides specific scriptural support about specific areas of an author's writings, and does so lovingly, there's no reason to use the red herring argument of name-calling and false labeling.
Anyway...take a read of Cathy's review.
