Shacking Up with Dr. T

(Honorary) Dr. John F. Tuttle, Jr.

District Superintendent

Far Right Oklahoma District

Church of the Nasterine

"Panhandling our hardest for Christ."

I find myself beyond disturbed by the trend of good, God-fearing Nasterine pastors being drawn in by the theological inaccuracies of The Shack, originally a book by noted deplorable William P. Young, recently released as a major motion picture starring the Australian who fights Greek gods and the lady who makes pies filled with excrement. I’m especially disappointed in Tim McGraw, who I’ve greatly respected since the release of his hit song about how there’s no sense dying if you haven’t read The Bible.

I’d like to refute the theological inaccuracies of this disgraceful book, but since I would never do anything as sinful as go to the movies or read a book I can’t pick up on the shelf at Lifeway, I’m going to do my best with word of mouth interpretation and second-hand hearsay. My three points that reveal The Shack as flagrant falsehood are as follows: (1) theology should never be based on a book that can’t be understood with a straightforward literal reading and interpretation, (2) while women can be pastors, God is definitely a man, and (3) the kingdom is about saving souls and stomping out sin, not “sharing life together.”

“Theology should never be based on a book that can’t be understood with a straightforward literal reading and interpretation.”

Do you know what I love about The Bible (besides everything)? It is a completely simple and easy to read book. No confusing metaphors or poetic language to trick you, no allegorical stories that have hidden meanings and interpretations, and all written in colloquial, completely understandable and relatable King James English from the 1600s. But no, not The Shack. The Shack wants to confuse you with metaphors and similes and participles that dangle every which way but loose. The Shack uses a lot of flowery language to try and obscure meaning, and as Christians we can never trust any kind of book which has to be interpreted just to be understood.

“While women can be pastors, God is definitely a man.”

I know that we as Nasterines are a lot more *sigh* progressive than some other denominations when it comes to allowing women to be ordained elders. And, until I can successfully lobby enough people to get that changed in the manual, I’m going to continue to pretend to be okay with it. But come on: surely Jehovah Jireh could never be seen to be a woman. God makes war, judges people, and demands that he have everything his way. What on earth could God possibly have in common with the gender that creates life? The gender that is known for nurturing and encouraging? The gender that works twice as hard for half the credit? No, I’m sorry. God is a man, and there’s no possible way you could convince me otherwise.

“The kingdom is about saving souls and stomping out sin, not ‘sharing life together.’”

Finally, I can’t abide with The Shack’s idea that God’s primary desire is for relationship with people. I mean, has William P. Young even read the Great Commission? God wants hard workers, people who treat the Church like a corporation and soul-winning like a sales pitch. We can’t build relationships with sinners before they change everything about their lives to be more like us! What would the church down the street think? How would it be reflected at Assembly? Not in my backyard! If the Church is going to stand out from the world around us, then we have to keep reminding them how sinful they are and how God doesn’t care for it at all. I’ll stick to whitewashing my tombs, thank you very much.

I hope this letter helped to clarify for some of you the dangers inherent in stories like The Shack. Please make sure that if you catch anyone at your church reading it, you gather up the copies and burn them immediately. It’s what Jesus would want us to do.

Praying for poor, literate sinners,

Rock Doc T.