He was and is the God-man, and He was both sent by the Father and went willingly to the cross, not as a helpless or victimized child. (See Bruce Ware’s article The Father Sent Jesus to the Cross.) In fact, Scripture reveals a Father who sent His Son, and a Son, coeternal and coequal with the Father and the Holy Spirit, who willingly laid His life down for us on the cross (John 10:17-18). Some of what Lies We Believe About God says about the evangelical view of the cross of Christ makes it sound like those who teach substitutionary atonement would actually be pro-child abuse. That makes it official: no more arguments about whether the author of The Shack is a universalist. Paul Young says these exact words: “Are you suggesting that everyone is saved? That you believe in universal salvation? That is exactly what I am saying!” (p. He admits at last (several years ago, I had two three-hour conversations with him in which he hinted this without saying it directly) he really is a universalist. But in Lies We Believe About God, Paul Young has stated more forthrightly not only his universalism, but also a number of other unbiblical doctrines. Many were able to overlook some of the theological problems while at the same time being impacted by the good they found. To be clear, The Shack has many explicit errors too, but people debated or seemed to not notice what the author was really saying. Given the book’s popularity, and the subsequent release of the movie by the same title, I’m disappointed and concerned that the countless people influenced by The Shack and many of its more implicit errors will be led into increasingly significant explicit errors by reading Lies We Believe About God. But as is often the case with false doctrine, the truth serves to make the error appear more credible. I’ve read the whole book, and I saw truth intermixed with unbiblical error. However, Lies We Believe About God shows in the author’s own words how far he has departed from some basic and central evangelical doctrines. I have friends who read Paul’s writings, and my desire isn’t to take away from the positives they’ve received from The Shack. I wanted to believe the best, and not be quick to misunderstand or accuse. This book clearly reveals the author’s actual theology.

Ironically, many of the doctrinal concerns that I and many others expressed about his novel The Shack (and in response, were told “it’s just fiction” and “this isn’t theology” and “that’s not what he’s saying”) have proven to be true. Last year, Paul Young, author of The Shack, had a book come out called Lies We Believe About God.

While it’s increasingly popular today, it stands in conflict with God’s Word. But as time goes on, I continue to see people adversely influenced by the theology expressed in this book. I didn’t post it then because honestly, I hate to get involved in quarrels with the many people who will disagree.

Paul young author of the shack