Another Shack Response: Who is Casting Stones?

Today's TG has another editorial printed in response to my Shack editorial.  I have to say that it is a must read.  The author's ability to write is quite good.  Unfortunately, most of what he says is wrong.

The initial line reads, "In his letter regarding The Shack, the Rev. Matt Timmons displays unusual ignorance, fear and arrogance simultaneously."  Ok, I will give him that.  These words could not be truer.  I am ignorant.  I will also confess that I am perhaps more arrogant than he even suspects.  I am fearful too--though probably not in the way he suggests.  I am fearful that people who are embracing The Shack are also embracing the errors expoused in The Shack.

The second line reads, "He ignores the fact that The Shack is a work of fiction and never claims to be a deep theological work."  Actually, I did acknowledge both these points in my editorial.  The qualm I have is that the book explicitly seeks to communicate ideas about God and life.

He goes on to say, "He wants to overlook that people are being touched by the story and want to discuss the themes in the book."  I do not ignore the fact that people are being touched by the story.  I wrote the article because people are being touched by the story.  Their enthrallment makes me wonder if they are keen to the unorthodox ideas presented in it. 

As well, I would love to discuss the themes of the book with those who are willing.  My blog post acknowledges this (the brevity premitted by TG articles could not permit space to make such an offer).  I have also considered having a pre-Shack seminar so that I could have the chance to discuss it with any who were willing.  If you want to discuss it, let's get together.  I'll buy the coffee!

Throughout his article the author states that I don't want people to read the book or listen to the article (the book burning was a good line, by the way).  I never said that though.  I just said that people who do should be aware of the mistaken ideas.  You can read the Book of Mormon as far as I care.  You just have to do it with a discerning eye.

He went on to say that I am afraid to address the author.  Actually, I am not.  If I had the opportunity, I would love to do so (again, I'll buy the coffee).  I would love to go to the conference too.  So if there are any extra (i.e. free) tickets out there, please let me know.

The author then speaks to my

arrogantly attacking the entire staff of dedicated learned educators at Ashland Theological Seminary while asking the rest of us to trust his obviously limited knowledge.  He'd rather throw stones at those who want to expand their understanding and experience of our God through open conversation.

My response is, "My stone was cast with the utmost humility and tears."  It is my hope that the wounds of a friend will be better than the kisses of an enemy.

I might also say that I don't know where any of the professors at ATS stand regarding the book and conference.  They might object to it or be repulsed by it.  If they have/are, they have my deepest respects.  The truth stands though: of all the people the seminary could have had in who are renowed for building up the body of Christ and dealing with the subject of suffering, they chose to bring in one whose book openly denies some of the most essential tenets of the faith.
 
The article then states,

In determining that he is the guardian of truth and encouraging the rest of us to listen only to him, The Rev. Timmons' letter is a perfect example of why many young people have turned away from the church instead of toward it.

I agree with this to some extent:  I am a guardian of the truth.  Every Christian is.  Speaking of doctrinal truth, Paul tells Timothy (and us) to "guard the good deposit entrusted to you."  In my article I referred to Jude's exhortation to contend for the faith.  This means that we are to vie for this body of truth with all our might. 

I do not say though, that you are to listen only to me.  This would be the last thing I ever say.  My mantra is always:  Sola Scriptura!  Go to it, and listen to the God who speaks there.

The author concludes by calling me "an uptight Ashland preacher."  I have to take offense at this one.  Anyone who knows me knows that I am not uptight.  I'm quite laid back (I did take great joy in reading this article and commend others to go read it after all!). 

Well...Ok, I am uptight.  When it comes to the flock of God being lead astray and our most holy faith being perverted, I do get a little tense.  I beg your forgiveness though.