<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
> <channel><title>Comments on: The Shack</title> <atom:link href="http://reasontostand.org/archives/2009/06/15/the-shack/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://reasontostand.org/archives/2009/06/15/the-shack</link> <description>Faith strengthened through evidence.</description> <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 14:39:04 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator> <item><title>By: Open Theism and Pacifism?</title><link>http://reasontostand.org/archives/2009/06/15/the-shack/comment-page-1#comment-1648</link> <dc:creator>Open Theism and Pacifism?</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2011 04:42:56 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://reasontostand.org/?p=95#comment-1648</guid> <description>[...] recently addressed the theological issues with The Shack [...]</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] recently addressed the theological issues with The Shack [...]</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Seth</title><link>http://reasontostand.org/archives/2009/06/15/the-shack/comment-page-1#comment-1291</link> <dc:creator>Seth</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 15 Dec 2010 19:21:11 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://reasontostand.org/?p=95#comment-1291</guid> <description>True, true. A friend of mine thinks that Christians shouldn&#039;t be intellectual, that Christianity is all about blind faith. Of course, Christianity is about faith, but what is faith? To have faith in something, you must have knowledge of that something. I think we should devour all knowledge that is given to us from God, it only makes the faith stronger.
The link about C.S. Lewis&#039; views on salvation goes to a Mcafee link. I just thought I would let you know. :) </description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>True, true. A friend of mine thinks that Christians shouldn&#039;t be intellectual, that Christianity is all about blind faith. Of course, Christianity is about faith, but what is faith? To have faith in something, you must have knowledge of that something. I think we should devour all knowledge that is given to us from God, it only makes the faith stronger.</p><p>The link about C.S. Lewis&#039; views on salvation goes to a Mcafee link. I just thought I would let you know. <img
src="http://reasontostand.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif?9d7bd4" alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /></p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Wes Widner</title><link>http://reasontostand.org/archives/2009/06/15/the-shack/comment-page-1#comment-1290</link> <dc:creator>Wes Widner</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 15 Dec 2010 01:23:18 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://reasontostand.org/?p=95#comment-1290</guid> <description>Thanks Seth!
I still maintain that the author doesn&#039;t view his own beliefs with regards to God as fiction. Based on interviews he has given and his own articles, he wrote &quot;The Shack&quot; to express his views of God. Sure, he chose the medium of fiction as opposed to the medium of a technical theological textbook, but so what? Are we really supposed to believe that The Chronicles of Narnia tells us nothing of CS Lewis&#039;s religious views (including his views on salvation outside of Christ &lt;a href=&quot;http://mcaf.ee/b9e41)&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://mcaf.ee/b9e41)&lt;/a&gt;?
Ultimately, I think &quot;The Shack&quot; is dangerous not because of its contents but because of its perpetuation of a popular mental cancer that is prevalent in the Church. That cancer is intellectualism and no where is it more evident than when we encounter sloppy (at best) works like &quot;The Shack&quot; and proceed to push people who like it to employ their minds and think about it analytically. </description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Seth!</p><p>I still maintain that the author doesn&#039;t view his own beliefs with regards to God as fiction. Based on interviews he has given and his own articles, he wrote &quot;The Shack&quot; to express his views of God. Sure, he chose the medium of fiction as opposed to the medium of a technical theological textbook, but so what? Are we really supposed to believe that The Chronicles of Narnia tells us nothing of CS Lewis&#039;s religious views (including his views on salvation outside of Christ <a
href="http://mcaf.ee/b9e41)" rel="nofollow"></a><a
href="http://mcaf.ee/b9e41" rel="nofollow">http://mcaf.ee/b9e41</a>)?</p><p>Ultimately, I think &quot;The Shack&quot; is dangerous not because of its contents but because of its perpetuation of a popular mental cancer that is prevalent in the Church. That cancer is intellectualism and no where is it more evident than when we encounter sloppy (at best) works like &quot;The Shack&quot; and proceed to push people who like it to employ their minds and think about it analytically.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Seth</title><link>http://reasontostand.org/archives/2009/06/15/the-shack/comment-page-1#comment-1289</link> <dc:creator>Seth</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 14 Dec 2010 20:29:25 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://reasontostand.org/?p=95#comment-1289</guid> <description>I couldn&#039;t agree more.
My mom asked me if I had read the Shack and I told her that I hadn&#039;t, but I had read reviews by reputable theologians (Norman Geisler) stating that the author&#039;s view of God is skewed, which could have a devastating impact on weak Christians. I gave her the example of God taking forms of different beings and she fed me the line in your post, &quot;it&#039;s fiction.&quot; I couldn&#039;t believe my mom had taken the bait. I&#039;m thinking about sending her this post. :) </description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I couldn&#039;t agree more.</p><p>My mom asked me if I had read the Shack and I told her that I hadn&#039;t, but I had read reviews by reputable theologians (Norman Geisler) stating that the author&#039;s view of God is skewed, which could have a devastating impact on weak Christians. I gave her the example of God taking forms of different beings and she fed me the line in your post, &quot;it&#039;s fiction.&quot; I couldn&#039;t believe my mom had taken the bait. I&#039;m thinking about sending her this post. <img
src="http://reasontostand.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif?9d7bd4" alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /></p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Open Theism and Pacifism? :</title><link>http://reasontostand.org/archives/2009/06/15/the-shack/comment-page-1#comment-562</link> <dc:creator>Open Theism and Pacifism? :</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 28 May 2010 21:59:14 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://reasontostand.org/?p=95#comment-562</guid> <description>[...] recently addressed the theological issues with The Shack [...]</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] recently addressed the theological issues with The Shack [...]</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using apc
Database Caching 6/14 queries in 0.529 seconds using apc
Object Caching 374/379 objects using apc

Served from: reasontostand.org @ 2012-02-08 21:20:42 -->
