Shack Ambiguity

This past Saturday morning-- a little earlier than I like to rise on the weekend-- I had the pleasure to sit in a small gathering of about 30 fathers and chat with William Paul Young, author of the multi-million fictional best seller "The Shack."
For those who have not read it, do yourself a favor and click the blog title and buy it as soon as you're done reading this entry.  You will NOT regret it one iota.  I promise.
If you've never heard of the book-- besides me asking where you've been hiding-- I would like to state a couple tidbits just to put things in perspective:
- Selling 7,500 books means it's a "best seller."
- Selling 100,000 books means Hollywood will talk to you.
- John Grisham sold 15 million books in his writing career.
- In only a couple years, "The Shack" has 12.5 million copies in print in over 30 languages.
So, suffice it to say that there is something going on with this book and I would strongly encourage you to check it out.

So, in this intimate gathering of fathers from my child's elementary school, we got to have a Q&A session with Paul (as he is known to his friends).
For those not familiar with the book, let me quote the synopsis from the recent publisher's website:

Mackenzie Allen Philips’ youngest daughter, Missy, has been abducted during a family vacation and evidence that she may have been brutally murdered is found in an abandoned shack deep in the Oregon wilderness. Four years later in the midst of his Great Sadness, Mack receives a suspicious note, ostensibly from God, inviting him back to that shack for a weekend.

Against his better judgment he arrives at the shack on a wintry afternoon and walks back into his darkest nightmare. What he finds there will change Mack's world forever and quite possibly your own.

In a world where religion seems to grow increasingly irrelevant The Shack wrestles with the timeless question, “Where is God in a world so filled with unspeakable pain?” The answers Mack gets will astound you and perhaps transform you as much as it did him. You’ll want everyone you know to read this book!

Pretty heavy, eh?  Well, evidently a LOT of people think so too are being changed by what they read in the pages.

One of the results of the book's release is, of course,  a certain level of controversy.  Can any discussion of religion or God-- ESPECIALLY when literally MILLIONS of people are involved-- be bereft of controversy?   Well, this book jumps into it straight away in how it challenges commonly held conceptions of God, sin, salvation, the Trinity and other issues.

Oh, ok.  I'll give one example:  What author would dare present the character of God (The Father) as a large, African-American woman who LOVES to cook?  The main character, Mack, asks the same question and seems to become quite satisfied with the biblically consistent answer.  God is, after all, the One who created mankind in His own image- male and female, he created them both- did (S)He not?  And He represents the fullness of all His creation.  And how many biblical terms describing God are of the female gender (a hen guarding her chicks, the Spirit travailing as in labor...)?  I think you get the idea.

So the idea that the book is controversial is out there.  Just like Jesus was in His day.  Hmmm...

There was one thing Paul said in our time together that really struck me.  He was addressing something having to do with the controversies in answering a question by a man sitting next to me who happened to be a pastor.  His question-- along with some of the controversial issues-- had to do with one of the christian doctrinal ideas brought up in the book.  I can't remember the question or even the doctrinal issue   brought up, but the two men had to agree to disagree.  And then Paul went on a short time later to make a wonderful observation about biblical ambiguities.

(As an aside, I am terribly interested in the whole idea of biblical ambiguity right now; especially since I have been having an ongoing Facebook tete-a-tete with an atheist who believes in nothing than cannot be "proven."  Funny how he believes evolution though.  ANYway...)

So Paul Young is discussing ambiguities and the question of "If God wanted us to know the truth and follow it, then why is so much of it ambiguous at times?  Why didn't He put in a FAQ's at the end of the Bible and let us all have definitive answers to the big questions of doctrine, faith, creation, etc?"

Paul's answer (which stuck a chord in me) went something like this...

I think that one reason for the ambiguity is that-- in the example of two people discussing an apparent difference of biblical interpretation-- ambiguity highlights one's heart.

Think about that.

Out of the overflow of one's heart comes the words of the mouth.

In two people vehemently discussing their conviction of the correct interpretation of some doctrinal key point, how do they express themselves?  Are they opinionated, angry, forceful, defensive, pushy, arrogant, haughty or rude?  Or are they gracious, respectful, humble, open-minded, peaceful, easy-going and other-oriented?  Are the fruits of the Spirit manifested when the going gets heated?

It's quite an eye-opening way to think about such things, no?

How often are we reminded of sign carrying, church going masses who hurl intentionally inflammatory slurs at those they should hope to reach with their message of hope?

I, for one, greatly appreciated the expressed thought that God's ambiguity has a purpose.  If for no other reason than to grow our faith, which is how we are counted righteous after all.

The satanic cellist

I saw something that a person pretty much never sees this past weekend at church.
While sitting a few rows back and just settling into the worship band's opening songs, I noticed the cello player who customarily sits right up front, stage right.
He was there as usual and the rest of the band was in their normal places (drums, piano, keyboard, 2 guitars and electric bass).  But I was struck by what he was wearing.
It's not that he was wearing a T-shirt because our church is very casual and somewhat non-traditional, so that was very par for the course.  But it's what was on his T-shirt that struck me.
Yes, he was wearing an ACDC rock T-shirt!  Up front, at church, playing cello!!

For those unfamiliar with ACDC, they are a hard rock band from Australia who have been around since I was a kid.  And they scared me then!  Just to put things in perspective, here is a partial list of some of their biggest hits:  Highway to Hell, Hells Bells, Back in Black, Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap...  Anyway, get the idea?
So, the whole thing just seemed ODD.  Some questions running through my mind were: "Why would the worship leader let him wear that?"  "Don't the church leaders know who ACDC is?"  "Why would a cellist like ACDC anyway??"
But then I began to think another way...
You know, when all is said and done, it's a T-SHIRT.  Perhaps the leadership cares more about other, more important things than just clothing.
Yes, one could make an argument that advertising something that purports to diametrically oppose one's own purposes is self defeating and unwise; but on the other hand, perhaps making a big to-do of judging an un-offensive T-shirt would be more self-defeating and unwise.
As I thought more about it, I realized that I liked belonging to a church that didn't make a big deal out of a T-shirt.  Think of how many other people-- perhaps new to the church scene-- noticed that too and thought, "Wow, that's cool.  Maybe I CAN be myself here."
After all, isn't that what the whole point of church/religion is supposed to be: reaching people where they are and being REAL?  I think so.
I just hope I don't see a Slayer shirt anytime soon.