"The Shack" -- anybody read this book?

[Captain Pike]

This fictional book, "The Shack", by William Paul Young describes a very intriguing encounter with God. As I follow along through this book, I am delighted by the author's way of revealing this very interesting concept which has become a very important part of my life these days.
Is this a touchy thing to write fiction about? Is he accurate? Will theologists condemn him for this work?
I really enjoy reading about what happens to the protagonist in this story. I don't doubt that any reader wouldn't want to have an actual encounter with the Creator of the universe.
I'll admit to being a beginner in my search for spirituality in this human world. I hope that it's not "wrong" to enjoy the story.

Anybody else got any ideas relating to this?

[L.M. The Third]

Well, this might turn out to be a highly flammable thread, with the rather religious theme. There was another thread quite a while back about this book. I believe some concluded it was rather badly written. I have not read the book, but I would advise the most extreme and strenuous caution in accepting any doctrinal thesis in this book. "Prove all things."

[Captain Pike]

... but I would advise the most extreme and strenuous caution in accepting any doctrinal thesis in this book. "Prove all things."

well right, but... how? And further, is there a body of science around the entire concept of spirituality... where we came from (the other idea)? I mean, I've read much about the Big Bang theory, and the mathematical formulations of such a cataclysm. ther'd's lots of math and physics involved in the discussions there.
This guy, Young, the author, has used some words, big words, which gave me the idea that maybe there is a Scientific Field of Study relating to these concepts. I just don't know what that is and I am interested.

But relating to heresy or blasphemy, can a person write about these things, fictionally, without being persecuted? And if not, why not? I mean, there are lots of stories about things we don't really know the truth about. Most of these are entertaining and even useful.
I guess I expected there'd be some controversy. Why can't we embrace Christianity or the other forms of religion with interest and entertaining fiction?
I like this book. Maybe it's wrong (according to someone (another human with ego)). I say, what gets us interested, enthusiastic and excited about God, is a good thing.

[L.M. The Third]

Well, how you're going to prove religious things will depend on what you accept as authority. If you accept the Bible as the ultimate religious authority then you'll have to test the theories of the book by that. If not, then you'll have to use critical and well-informed reason, I guess. As I've said, I haven't read this book, so I can't personally comment on the concepts.

I don't know what you mean by the term "persecuted". Very seldom, if ever, in Western nations will a book be censored for setting forth that which is "blasphemy" to another religion. (Though, with laws about hate speech that is actually changing drastically, I suppose. So, yes, I'm contradicting myself entirely, and quite knowingly.) Because religious fiction is so naively accepted by many readers, some feel the call to refute the dogmas set forth in such a work. And yet I'd be the last to say that fiction should not be used in the religious field. It's an extremely powerful, subtle tool of communicating thought. But it is because of it's emotional subtlety that it is not always evaluated critically enough.

[Captain Pike]

Right on, LM, and I'll be the first to admit that the US is like a little kid with his father's gun -- inexperienced and powerful and scary as hell.
And by persecuted, I simply meant, shunned on Oprah, and getting a bad rap... not purchased.
It's a funny thing though, as you allude, I believe, we resist this kind of fiction. And I meant it just like you have said...

It's an extremely powerful, subtle tool of communicating thought.

And, after all, we have no problem with the nonscientific or downright incorrect portrayal of types of science fiction. As an engineering type person, I often run into little, gotchas, in reading all sorts of things. People don't know the basic science behind electricity, hydraulics, vacuum, the list goes on. But we read along without hiccup, across far-fetched inaccuracies, for the sake perhaps of a good story. Sometimes it throws me off though [I'm getting off the subject here], just like when I see an actor mouthing another player's line -- it smashes the fourth wall, and the magic is gone. Often times, from then on, I can't get past the image of the actor, holding the script, during the read through. Things stick in my mind, when they, for example, break a law of physics.
In my own writing, I'm often stymied by the research I feel is necessary when talking about a thing that people might very well know much better than I, what's possible or not. That's especially weird since nobody reads my stuff, anyway!! Sniff sniff.
Anyway. I think God'd be happy for any of us to read or write about him in a positive light. I'm glad this guy did to write, the shack.