-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The Shack
- Thread starter timf
- Start date
I thought the movie was great!
I am surprised there is so much attention on the female thing. He (she) explains that due to the guy's image of a father being harsh and abusive, he really needed a mother at the time. Nowhere is it implied that God IS female.
Most folks I know are bent out of shape over the scene where everyone who lived was in this field with a glorified body. They assume the point is that everyone goes to heaven right when they die. The movie makes no such claim. Not sure if the book does.
My friends say that it is heresy to think that God could, or would, bring everyone to a point of repentance at some point in the future. They say we MUST have a hell of eternal torture because that is what the majority believes and they can't be wrong.
This is no different than going to an opposing denomination and hearing a different version of religion than you are used to.
Do we think people are so gullible that they will start believing heresy just because some movie portrays it? There are thousands of YouTube videos with all sorts of wild ideas. Most of us are able to spot the tricksters. The holy spirit tells us what to avoid.
If we don't have him, then we probably already believe loads of balderdash.
I am surprised there is so much attention on the female thing. He (she) explains that due to the guy's image of a father being harsh and abusive, he really needed a mother at the time. Nowhere is it implied that God IS female.
Most folks I know are bent out of shape over the scene where everyone who lived was in this field with a glorified body. They assume the point is that everyone goes to heaven right when they die. The movie makes no such claim. Not sure if the book does.
My friends say that it is heresy to think that God could, or would, bring everyone to a point of repentance at some point in the future. They say we MUST have a hell of eternal torture because that is what the majority believes and they can't be wrong.
This is no different than going to an opposing denomination and hearing a different version of religion than you are used to.
Do we think people are so gullible that they will start believing heresy just because some movie portrays it? There are thousands of YouTube videos with all sorts of wild ideas. Most of us are able to spot the tricksters. The holy spirit tells us what to avoid.
If we don't have him, then we probably already believe loads of balderdash.
Upvote
0
- Jun 22, 2007
- 27,338
- 7,348
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
That sounds more like Dante's Inferno rather than the Bible. I think what most churches teach about hell (or what's been passed down to us through our families) isn't even in the Bible. As far as I know.....we don't really have biblical support to back up the idea that there's NOT reconciliation of ALL of God's creation (as the movie depicts). There is this Bible verse that supports the movie's assertion that God will reconcile all creation to the Creator: "and through him God reconciled everything to himself. He made peace with everything in heaven and on earth by means of Christ's blood on the cross" (Col 1:20). IOW.....I don't think this movie even *was* heretical. I think it is all about shattering our preconceived ideas about God.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
South Bound
I stand with Israel.
I joked on Facebook that we should adopt a new criteria for church membership and baptism candidates: Let them watch The Shack movie and if they can't spot the heresies, then we send them back to the New Believers' class.
Seriously, the lack of discernment among people who identify as Christians is really shameful.
I shudder to think what's being taught in some churches these days and I really do fear for the pastors and elders who are letting their members down by not teaching the the basic doctrines of Christianity.
Seriously, the lack of discernment among people who identify as Christians is really shameful.
I shudder to think what's being taught in some churches these days and I really do fear for the pastors and elders who are letting their members down by not teaching the the basic doctrines of Christianity.
Upvote
0
South Bound
I stand with Israel.
No kidding. You have to wonder what's being taught in the churches some of these people go to.
Upvote
0
South Bound
I stand with Israel.
Upvote
0
mnphysicist
Have Courage to Trust God!
- May 11, 2005
- 7,764
- 669
- 60
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Widowed
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Heresies are tricky deals... it usually takes years of studying through the ecumenical councils to get a handle on them, and even then its easy for stuff to slip through.
I don't think the elements of Sabellianism, Patripassionism, and a form of Arianism are really that huge a deal in the film. After all, its a film of fiction, not a theological treatise. This is not to say Christology doesn't matter... but when it comes to art, I think heresy hunting goes too far.
Granted, there are issues which will cause heartburn for some folks, especially if they have only been taught or believe only one theory out of many in regards to atonement and the destiny of the unevangelized.
The film pretty much ignores penal substitution atonement theory and chooses a mix of eastern and Christus Victor atonement theories instead, neither of which is considered a heresy. Alas, some folks integrate PSA theory into the Gospel and near totally ignore the 7 other major theories to say nothing of the minor ones.
It also engages with a number of theories as concerns the eternal destiny of the unevangelized. If one is locked into restrictivism theory, this will be problematic. On the other hand, being exposed to some of the other theories is not a bad thing. Inclusivism (related to the teachings of Billy Graham and the Catholic church) runs through it, as well as parts of "if" theory, religious instrumentalism, and post mortem evangelism. It seems a real stretch to say the film is advocating universalism, short of folks who believe anything other than restrictivism is universalism.
On a positive note the film goes hard core into theodicy, (the problem of evil... if God is all good, and God is all powerful, then why does evil exist?).. and nothing presented seems outside the bounds of the scriptures in that regard. Rather, this should be a starting point for church discussion, as far too often, theodicy is an issue that gets glossed over with a couple cherry picked scriptures in most churches.
Bottom line, the film pushes the edges of a box that man chose to put God in. I think thats a good thing, as it causes folks to think through what they really believe... and more so, might lead a few to dig into the scriptures. Worst case, lets say someone buys into patripassionism... and while this is problematic, I really can't see this as something that someone would lean on their sword over. Rather, when presented with scriptural evidence, I believe such is easily corrected.
I don't think the elements of Sabellianism, Patripassionism, and a form of Arianism are really that huge a deal in the film. After all, its a film of fiction, not a theological treatise. This is not to say Christology doesn't matter... but when it comes to art, I think heresy hunting goes too far.
Granted, there are issues which will cause heartburn for some folks, especially if they have only been taught or believe only one theory out of many in regards to atonement and the destiny of the unevangelized.
The film pretty much ignores penal substitution atonement theory and chooses a mix of eastern and Christus Victor atonement theories instead, neither of which is considered a heresy. Alas, some folks integrate PSA theory into the Gospel and near totally ignore the 7 other major theories to say nothing of the minor ones.
It also engages with a number of theories as concerns the eternal destiny of the unevangelized. If one is locked into restrictivism theory, this will be problematic. On the other hand, being exposed to some of the other theories is not a bad thing. Inclusivism (related to the teachings of Billy Graham and the Catholic church) runs through it, as well as parts of "if" theory, religious instrumentalism, and post mortem evangelism. It seems a real stretch to say the film is advocating universalism, short of folks who believe anything other than restrictivism is universalism.
On a positive note the film goes hard core into theodicy, (the problem of evil... if God is all good, and God is all powerful, then why does evil exist?).. and nothing presented seems outside the bounds of the scriptures in that regard. Rather, this should be a starting point for church discussion, as far too often, theodicy is an issue that gets glossed over with a couple cherry picked scriptures in most churches.
Bottom line, the film pushes the edges of a box that man chose to put God in. I think thats a good thing, as it causes folks to think through what they really believe... and more so, might lead a few to dig into the scriptures. Worst case, lets say someone buys into patripassionism... and while this is problematic, I really can't see this as something that someone would lean on their sword over. Rather, when presented with scriptural evidence, I believe such is easily corrected.
Upvote
0
- Jan 2, 2015
- 11,556
- 5,727
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Presbyterian
- Marital Status
- Married
That's a great idea; however, it's the people who have been in evangelical churches for 20 years who think the Shack is a wonderful and helpful book/movie! What are we to do with them???
I general, there is little doctrine taught at the average church in the US. Both pastors/elders and those sitting in the pews are to blame.
Upvote
0
- Jan 2, 2015
- 11,556
- 5,727
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Presbyterian
- Marital Status
- Married
God put Himself "in a box". He is not anything and everything. He has defined who He is and who we are, and we are not to reimagine who He is but rather, we are to come to learn who He is through His word - His "box".
Upvote
0
- Jan 2, 2015
- 11,556
- 5,727
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Presbyterian
- Marital Status
- Married
Their pastors likely used clips from the Shack during last weeks "sermon"
Upvote
0
South Bound
I stand with Israel.
Portraying God the Father and God the Holy Spirit as humans, stating that the three persons of the Godhead submit to one another and to an, Universalism, the idea that the three persons of the Godhead "spoke ourselves into existence as the son of god", when "Papa" claims that Jesus never drew upon His divine power or authority as God, where "Jesus" says that he's merely one of any ways man may relate to God, etc
Upvote
0
dysert
Member
Well given that God is spirit, I think He can manifest Himself anyway He wants to, so I don't see that as heretical. Now if they said in the movie that the three persons of the Godhead "spoke ourselves into existence as the son of god", and that Jesus "never drew upon His divine power or authority as God", and that Jesus said He's "merely one of many ways man may relate to God", then I must have been half asleep while watching the movie and reading the book. I don't remember those things at all, but you're right - if they're true it certainly would be heretical. Thanks.
Upvote
0
South Bound
I stand with Israel.
It isn't about what God is capable or not capable of doing. It's about what God has said He will do and how He's described His nature.
God has described Himself as immutable If you don't believe that then that's between you and Him.
Upvote
0
dysert
Member
I understand that God is immutable, but the question is, what does that really mean? For example we have Heb 13:8 -> "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever." Does that mean that He has *always* had nailprints in His hands? Does that mean that He was never tired one day and not tired another day? No. Immutability speaks to the nature of God, not His appearance. Immutability would be a good topic for another thread.
Upvote
0
South Bound
I stand with Israel.
Like I said, if you don't believe His Word, then that's between you and Him.
Upvote
0
South Bound
I stand with Israel.
You're defending the heresies in The Shack and trying to explain away God's immutable nature
Upvote
0
dysert
Member
Wow, that's a stretch! First of all, I agreed with you that if what you say is true about the movie then there are heretical statements. Second, I haven't tried to "explain away" God's immutable nature; in fact I said that His immutability speaks *to* His nature. And finally, I have never said I didn't believe His Word despite your unsubstantiated claim to the contrary.
It's been real.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
