I agree with you brother, all the way. When I think of great theologians who have written fiction, there is none greater than John Bunyan and Pilgrim’s Progress. C.S. Lewis is great too, but even Lewis’ theology comes out in his writing, especially his inclusivism in The Last Battle. In fact, Lewis is referenced more than anyone else I have read to support the theological construct of inclusivism–and this from a fictional book! So that alone speaks volumes of how theological convictions conveyed through fictional literature can be powerful for better or for worse. In the case of the Shack, my hear is that it could be detrimental to undiscerning readers as well. But you make a good point that this applies to all areas of information, including newspaper, television, internet, etc.

Please tell the Snowbird fam I said hello, especially Brody, Shawn, and Spence (oh and Luther and Lester as well).

Please call soon. I’d love to catch up. We’re super busy right now, just finishing up our staff training and moving into camp, but maybe this weekend would be good.

As far as to your response. I think that when Christians write good fiction it can do a ton for our awe and appreciation for God. Like for instance, even last night during our worship service, Brody was talking about Heaven and restored creation and I thought to myself, “The best picture that I have in my head about this is when Lewis talks about the emotions Ransom was feeling inside himself when he was eating the fruit on Perelandra.” And if you haven’t read the Space Trilogy by C.S. Lewis you really should. Or in Narnia when we see the way that Aslan can be so stern, but then so loving with the Pevensies I’m reminded of the love and discipline that is present in my personal relationship with Christ. Or even in “A Horse and His Boy” when it is Aslan that is chasing the kids and horses in the night so that they find each other and then at the end is the one that wounds them but also heals them.

Do you understand what I’m saying? Fiction can be powerfully emotive in challenging and inspiring our understanding of God. To be sure, “The Shack” does not promote a proper view of the Trinity and I hope that no one gets their Theology proper from this book. I’m not saying that it paints an accurate view of the Trinity, I don’t think it does, but I do think that Young says some things in really cool ways that could help us appreciate God more. Like when the Holy Spirit character says on page 101, “All love and relationship is possible for you only because it already exists within Me, within God myself.” Now in saying this, I’m not saying that I agree with all the Trinitarian implications that Young makes. But in the same sense, just because I love Lewis’ picture of what a restored creation looks like in Perelandra doesn’t mean I like his view of eschatology as evidenced in the Last Battle.

Anyway, I feel that I’ve rambled. My last point is that Christians need to think critically and Scripturally regarding every piece of media that comes before their eyes. This applies to movies, magazines, TV, blogs and books (especially Christian books).

Talk to you soon.

No problem. As I said, I should have verified my source, and I didn’t. I appreciate your encouragements on blue collar theology. It’s a work in progress, and I hope to vamp it up in the months to come.

I understand what you mean when saying that the literature not affectioning your conclusions; I am just concerned that the uncritical acceptance that occurs through a passive or theologically uninformed audience will play a considerable part in shaping one’s thoughts, even theological beliefs on core doctrinal matters. My hopes are that a blue collar theology and theological emphasis among the rank-and-file believers would help them be able to delineate between truth and error, sound doctrine and corrupting heresy.

Thanks for being willing to discuss these matters. Whether we agree or disagree on these matters (or others) your thoughts are welcome and appreciated. Grace and peace.

when it comes to reading fiction/literature and it not affecting my theological conclusions, that is pretty standard. Just because I read something doesn’t mean I have to believe it or condone it. I guess I feel like I am able to discern between a conclusion on a subject, and simply a statement or thought on a subject.

But your thoughts above are challenging! Thanks!

I am sorry that I missed you at graduation as well. I will try to catch up with you via phone soon. I would love to hear how married life is going!

The idea of a book being classified as fiction but speaking about characters who have a reference that are not in the least fictional, well, I find to be quite problematic. For even in the caveat that “this is fiction and not a theological treatise,” the author is making a theological statement whether we like it or not. Some will argue that one then is not reading a fictional book like they are supposed to you–you know, not take it seriously and all, but where do we draw the lines between what entertains us as fiction and what becomes a part and parcel of our worldview, having consciously or sub-consciously ingrained in our thinking?

For instance, how can it be said that the book has “the potential to lead someone into a greater awe for the Trinitarian God that we serve,” when the trinitarian nature is couched in the heresy of modalism? I just don’t understand how the two can be reconciled together.

So when I hear your comments and that of Brad, I am not intending to be polemic. I am wanting to know how it is possible to read fiction/literature and not come away with theological conclusions, whether admitted or not.

For the record, the purpose of my post was to make the point that we need more theologically-trained and equipped lay people (i.e. “blue collar theology”). I have not read the book myself; therefore, my response here is a response to the responses (if that makes sense). If the responses can be so varied and contradictory by men like Peterson and Mohler or Batterson and Driscoll, how do you think Billy and Jimmy who teach Sunday School at the downtown Baptist church will take it? Therefore, I found it fitting to present the case for our need of a blue collar theology.

I should have mentioned the source of my quote.

http://www.andyrowell.net/andy_rowell/2008/05/four-church-lea.html

I admit to having used a source that had misquoted you, and I apologize for not checking with you blog prior to posting it. I have made the correction, and it is reflected in the post.

Thanks for allowing me to join in on the conversation.