Lies We Believe About God

One of the more important books I have read in a long time.
Makes a clear, simple but in-depth statement for each chapter and then proceeds to elaborate with great examples what the specific lie is and how it affected the author and obviously us as well.

Reading it a second time, not because it is hard to follow, but because of the depth of the impact of what is covered.

Fantastic book. Everyone should read this. William Paul Young has a grasp on the love of the Father that transcends religion. Scripture says that where the spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. This book helps to set you free from the bondage of performing for the Fathers love. When you realize He loves you and you don't have to do anything to make Him love you it is mind blowing.

I've been thinking a lot lately about why I believe what I believe. What is the basis. Is it because that's what was handed to me and I never questioned? Whether familially, culturally, politically, religiously?

This book came at the perfect time for me. I'm not redefining scripture, or WHO I believe in, but some of these chapters were incredibly thought provoking. Some I agree with 100%. Others, maybe not as much. But I don't think his intent is to 'change our entire theology' but rather to give us somewhat of a different viewpoint. He even says I believe in the introduction something like you shouldn't take everything and thought he presents and cling to it, but rather read it and let it make you think.

I really appreciated his writing style. The chapters are short and were easy for me to keep focus as a busy wife and mom of little ones running around. I read it in just a couple days.

While some of the anecdotes Young related in the book were interesting--and some were even touching--this book should be re-titled, "What I Believe". This book has nothing to do with biblical truth--only with what Paul Young believes. It is, in that sense, a very narcissistic book, and is not at all true to what the Bible teaches about God, or anything having to do with biblical truth.

Elsewhere, the author has confessed that he was sexually abused by the natives (the Dani tribe) that he grew up with in New Guinea; however, in the chapter (about the "lie"), "God Is a Prude," he doesn't mention this incident; and, instead, seems to view their blatant sexuality as a healthy thing, in contrast to the supposedly prudishness of us (Westerners ???). Thus, he almost seems to justify their sexual abuse also.

His appendix, which he calls a "Catena" lists Scriptures which he believes support his blatant (and confessed) universalism; however, he not only yanks the Scriptures he cites out of their proper context (e. g., citing John 3:16-17--which could indicate universalism, if unqualified by verse 18, which clearly opposes universalism! Or 2 Cor. 5:19, without also quoting verse 20; which, again, militates against this view); he also actually, at times, changes the Scripture--such as his changing the pronoun "you" to "we" in Ephesians 2:8, because he believes it helps his case for universalism.

His Bonhoeffer quotes in his "Final Word" at the end of his book are also incorrectly cited--both as far as the page numbers in the edition he cites; and also he paraphrases, rather than giving a verbatim rendering.

Young doesn't seriously interact with any views that would oppose his own. Instead of the book being a "dialogue," it is a self-centered monologue, and will only be of any interest to readers of "The Shack," who want to know what the author of "The Shack" really believes. I say this, partly because he actually mentions or discusses "The Shack" in at least 13 of the book's 28 chapters; I counted). It does somewhat accomplish that purpose. (I have written a more extensive critique of "Lies" elsewhere).

If you want to discover actual lies about God, don't read this book. Instead, to see what God is really like, read the Bible and look at the life of Jesus: Jesus said, "He who has seen Me has seen the Father." (John 14:9) and "If you had known Me, you would have known my Father also" (John 14:7; see also John 8:19).

I read, liked and recommended The Shack. It touched me, but that was a novel, a fiction. This book is not. I can still feel Wm. Paul Young's pain, but I am not embracing his gospel of therapy.

Young's (and J. Baxter Kruger's) gospel is based on "The truth [is] that we have inherent value because we are made in the image of God" (Chap 2 "God is good. I am not").

Why isolate "value/worth" from all that is known of God? God is eternal, uncreated, holy, righteous, etc, why not include these in his image? Or having dominion over all creation (Gen 1:26), having eternal power and a divine nature (Rom 1:20), being transcendently glorious (2 Cor 3:18), invisible (Col 1:15), or omniscient (Col 3:10), all of which are explicitly connected with image?

Neither man nor God as portrayed by Wm. Paul Young ring "true" to my spirit.

"Among the sins to which the human heart is prone, hardly any other is more hateful to God than idolatry, for idolatry is at bottom a libel on His character. The idolatrous heart assumes that God is other than He is - in itself a monstrous sin - and substitutes for the true God one made after its own likeness. Always this God will conform to the image of the one who created it and will be base or pure, cruel or kind, according to the moral state of the mind from which it emerges.
A god begotten in the shadows of a fallen heart will quite naturally be no true likeness of the true God. "Thou thoughtest," said the Lord to the wicked man in the psalm, "that I was altogether such as one as thyself." Surely this must be a serious affront to the Most High God before whom cherubim and seraphim continually do cry, "Holy, holy, holy, Lord God of Sabaoth." A. W. Tozer, Knowledge of The Holy, Chap 1

The title sums it up...Lies we believe about God...but the lies aren't the ones you think. On the very core issues of Christianity, if you believe much of what Paul Young writes then you will indeed end up believing lies about God.

Young, author of The Shack, gives us his thoughts on the character of God. He says he is not presenting certainty but is establishing a conversation over rearranging his theology. Each chapter contains a statement he once believed and then his exploration of his change in belief.

While I do not agree with much (or most) of what Young says, I do think this book is good in that it makes us look at what we do believe about God. Young portrays a God he can live with, understand, and like. He is a God who likes us and behaves the way we think He should. He is a God who wouldn't “use” anyone and is submissive in His love relationship with us. He is a God who creates only good things so we humans are all good, we are all children of God.

Young presents us with many thought provoking ideas. These ideas are not a result of an exposition of Scripture but rather Young's thought process. That makes us think about our own ideas of God, where we get them and how we can evaluate them. It makes us think of where we should be getting our information about the character of God. Is it from our own reasoning or is it from the Bible?

Young does identify some areas where Christian have, I think, gotten it wrong. We have sometimes given people the wrong impression of God. Young has come across many who have been hurt by people misrepresenting God's character. That should make us stop and think about how we view God and how we represent Him to others.

Does this book contain what evangelical Christians would call heresy? Definitely. But this is not a theological treatise. This is one man's attempt to define a God with which he is comfortable, one that is rational and behaves the way he would like Him to behave. Is this the God of the Bible? That is what readers must decide.

It would be so nice if God were like the one Young describes. It is up to readers to evaluate what Young says against their source of truth. For me, it is the Bible, the one that says my human thoughts don't even come close to God's. I'll not presume to understand God nor attempt to define Him in a way that conforms to my expectations.

I gave this book 4 out 5 stars because it is thought provoking without being dogmatic.

I received a complimentary egalley of this book from the publisher. My comments are an independent and honest review.

This book would be more accurately titled, if it was changed to, "Lies I Believe About God" by Wm. Paul Young.

The infamous author of "The Shack" (and a couple of other titles), has now come out in plain non-fiction to announce his apostasy from Christianity. His intentions are otherwise: Liberalism and unbelief *in the church* have always sought to "save" Christianity, but in their efforts to do so, they always abandon Christianity. If you like guys like Brian McLaren (https://www.challies.com/articles/the-false-teachers-brian-mclaren) and Rob Bell, then you'll love this latest "taste of larger conversations" by William Paul Young.

In an era when criticism and refutation (Titus 1:9; 2 Timothy 4:3-4) is shunned as unloving and bigoted, many no doubt will have abandoned this review before they've reached this sentence. For those of you left - let me engage in the easy task of displaying for you why Wm. Paul Young is an open heretic and enemy of souls. The only difficulty is in finding words strong enough to convey the seriousness of his satanic sophistry. Jesus' words are apt, in Matthew 23, "Woe to you, you blind guide, you serpent, you viper, how are you to escape being sentenced to hell?" (v. 13-33)

To get to the lies that Paul believes, you have to listen to him explain phrases that he thinks are lies. In the "Introduction" he writes, "Each chapter refers to a statement I once believed and from which I have transitioned" (pg. 18). So, here are a few of his chapter titles, "Lies we believe about God" -

- "God is in Control," according to Paul Young, that is a lie.
- "You Need to Get Saved," according to Paul Young, that is a lie.
- "Hell is Separation from God," according to Paul Young, that is a lie.
- "The Cross was God's Idea," according to Paul Young, that is a lie.
- "Not Everyone Is a Child of God," according to Paul Young, that is a lie.
- "Sin Separates us From God," according to Paul Young, that is a lie.

You get the idea. I will commend Mr. Young for not be subtle.

As you make your way through this very easily read volume (253 pages, but readable in a few hours), Paul will explain what he now believes, in contradistinction to the alleged lies that he's exposing. Here's Paul Young in his own words:

-----

"Are you suggesting," he asks of himself, "that everyone is saved? That you believe in universal salvation? That is exactly what I am saying!" (pg. 118) "...We were all saved in eternity (2 Timothy 1:9)...We were all included in the birth, life, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus (2 Corinthians 5:19). Third, within the context of our own present tense, ongoing experience, we actively participate to work out what God has worked in (Philippians 2:12-13)." (pg. 119) "We don't judge anyone by how he or she is stuck or broken or lost, but see each person for who she is - the one the Holy Spirit finds and celebrates...We don't offer anyone what has already been given; we simply celebrate the Good News with each one: We've all been included" (pg. 120).

-----

"...How can we posit an eternally Good God, whose very nature is love, allowing human beings to be in conscious torment and pain for infinite time, as if that were somehow Just." (pg. 132) As Paul had sought to explain in 'The Shack," through the personification of the wisdom of God in "Spohia," - The keeping a record of people's wrongs, is an activity expressly forbidden in 1 Cor. 13 as something that "love" would never do (pg. 133). "This is a fire of love that now and forever is 'for' us, not against us" (pg. 136).

-----

"I mean that I don't think God would every say that once you die, your fate is sealed and there's nothing that God can do for you" (pg. 182). He believes that we still have "choice postmortem" - we can "change our minds" after we die (pg. 183). Again, quoting Paul Young, "Personally, I do believe that the idea that we lose our ability to choose at the event of physical death is a significant lie and needs to be exposed; its implications are myriad and far-reaching" (pg. 185-186).

-----

"God is never disappointed in you; God has no expectations...This God does not do abandonment. We will never be powerful enough to make God's face turn from us" (pg. 214-215).

-----

"We are all eternal beings who are completely loved at every point along the way, and regardless of what our journey looks like, we are relentlessly loved inside every part of the process of this life" (pg. 222).

-----

"If separation is a lie, does it mean that no one has ever been separated from God? That is exactly what it means...Jesus did not come to build a bridge back to God or to offer the possibility of getting separated...There is 'nothing' outside God. There is only God, and Creation is created 'in' God; and according to John 1, Creation is specifically created 'inside' Jesus, the Word who is God." (pg. 232) He asks, "Do we think that we can become so wretched and sinful that we become abhorrent to God? Some of us do..." But that is a lie, that too many believe, according to "Peace...Peace...when there is no Peace," Paul Young.

-----

In his horrific chapter explaining that the Cross was not God's idea, we see him advocating what Steve Chalke and Alan Mann supported in their 2003 book, "The Lost Message of Jesus." Chalke writes, "The fact is that the cross isn't a form of cosmic child abuse - a vengeful Father, punishing his Son for an offense he has not even committed. Understandably, both people inside and outside of the Church have found this twisted version of events morally dubious and a huge barrier to faith" (page 182 of "The Lost Message of Jesus"). That's what it would be, says Paul Young, if the Cross was God's idea, God's plan.

If God originated the Cross, if it was His idea, "then we worship a cosmic abuser, who in Divine Wisdom created a means to torture human beings in the most painful and abhorrent manner. Frankly, it is often this very cruel and monstrous god that the atheist refuses to acknowledge or grant credibility in any sense. And rightly so. Better no god at all, than this one" (pg. 149, "Lies We Believe About God").

The idea of propitiation, which is at the heart of the substitutionary death of Jesus Christ - the bearing of and taking away of the wrath of God - is abhorrent to Wm. Paul Young. He writes in another chapter,

"One of the narratives about God is that because of sin, God required child sacrifice to appease a sense of righteous indignation and the fury of holiness - Jesus being the ultimate child sacrifice. Well, if God is like that, then doesn't it make sense that we would follow in God's footsteps? But we know intuitively that such a thought is wrong, desperately wrong. And herein lies one of the most damning impacts of religion. It wields the power to justify its actions by grounding them in the purposes and will of God" (pg. 169).

-----

There's something deeply ironic and very troubling abut Paul's book as a whole. One of the chapters is titled, "God is Not Good." The lie creeps in, he writes, "We question the goodness of God" (pg. 139). The fact is, Paul Young offers an imaginary god that fits the categories of what he deems "good" and "loving." But the one and only true God revealed in Scripture and in the Lord Jesus Christ - The exclusive Lord of glory, the holy, holy, holy One who offers "the narrow road that leads to life; the God who saves and who threatens wrath and hell to all who don't believe - this God, this God is not "good" to Wm. Paul Young. As a man to be judged by his own words, this false teacher, Mr. Young has bought into the lie, that "God is not good."

There are numerous other lies that Paul Young embraces ("I am fundamentally good" pg. 35; "Love does not abandon me to the consequences of my choices" pg. 48; "We all have the ability to hear the voice of God in our own unique way of hearing" pg. 91-92; "Government is not instituted by or originated by God" pg. 102; "Christianity is not a religion - or even the best of all religions" pg. 58, 110), and even on relatively minor topics, he is often moronic (for example, he strongly objects to the idea that God wants to use us - "If God uses us, we are nothing but objects or commodities to God" pg. 62).

I kept asking myself while reading this book, "Does this man ever read the Bible?" And then secondly, "Why does he even quote the Bible?" His selectivity and distortions of Scripture are appalling.

All of this would be worth merely mocking, if the matter at hand were not so eternally serious. This book is the blatant tongue of the evil one (Galatians 1:6-8). Under the guise of sheepskin and the cloak of "explaining the way of Christ more accurately" (Acts 18:26), Paul Young is an influential false teacher that "shuts the kingdom of heaven in people's faces" (Matt. 23:13). He speaks to prison groups and gatherings of abuse victims, to atheists and to churches; and he beguiles them with the 'good news' of universalism: there is no eternal hell, there is no wrath of God hanging over the heads of unbelievers (there are no "unbelievers" technically - "Belief is an activity, not a category," pg. 203); "every human being...is a child of God" (pg. 206); we're all fundamentally good at the core of our beings - there is no separation from God - don't worry, be happy.

William Paul Young is not a Christian.

This book is not a Christian book.

Don't build your life on the shack, which is Paul Young's lies. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction. Rest your life on the Rock which is Jesus: hear His words, not the voice of the stranger, and find Life in the Truth (Matthew 6:13-27; John 14:6).

First off I'd like to say that this review and its contents are made with the upmost respect and love to all that have previously reviewed this product. That being said, I feel most of you may have missed the boat on this one. I see it as a child trying to push a square peg through a round hole, and when it doesn't work, disregards the toy as flawed (no I don't mean that disrespectfully).

The main problem I see in much of these reviews is that most people came to the table with their current understandings and definitions and tried to make Paul's writings fit into their box. An example of this is the word "submit." Many people saw it in a deragatory way, as if some dog submitting to its master, but this is not at all what Paul is trying to say. He even clarifies this in the particular chapter, relating it to Jesus washing the feet of his disciples, or Paul's father serving and taking care of his wife. He is redefining the word "submit."

I challenge you to read this book, with an open mind, not meaning that you should agree with all of Paul's statements, but attempt to step outside your box, and avoid calling him a heretic. That's really so Middle Ages. Happy reading.

This is a good book because it allows us to really know where the author is coming from wit no possibility of confusion. It also sheds light on where he is coming from in his other works. He does a good job being open and honest about his heresy. It's a good study in discernment. The book is well thought out and written well. From that standpoint, it deserves more than one star. It's purely the content that generates a 1 star review.

Paul Young dares to suggest that God is so much better than I ever imaged. The book dismantled thoughts in my brain about God that quite frankly I never ever substantiated but took for granted. I have read it quickly and was blown away with the beauty of truth and freedom, and the fullness of the love of god...I am going to go back and read this a few more times and let it all steep. Theologically and biblically referenced support throughout. It is no surprise that this book challenges the status quo of religion and has stirred it so deeply. So much of my own religious past was regurgitating what had been regurgitated for decades without really asking god whether it was true or not. This awakens that process of peeling back the blinding scales.

The international best-selling author and theologian C. Baxter Kruger gives a beautifully articulated prologue to this book. That in and of itself is a masterpiece and a read worth recommending as a standalone work!

In that day, you will know that He is in the Father, and you in him. From that vantage point stand affirmed in the power of god's mercy, love, and particular fondness of you!

Another Gospel, another Jesus. This book picks up on the popular trend of redefining the Gospel "in our own image". WPY is well documented in his departure from Christianity, and while The Shack only hinted at his beliefs, WPYs "Lies" reveals more clearly what he means.

In WPYs work, there is displayed a "love", of sorts, one in which the author can feel comfortable. Yet, a simple viewing of even the Narnia series shows a Lion that would lay down his life for a snitch.

The question is up to you, the reader... Which love is greater? The one that can intellectually spin a good tale, or a King who lays down His life for His friends.

This is the God of the Bible, the one that WPY denies and hates. This is the King who can save us, and the only Way there is.

WPY errors in his exegesis if Scripture, as any contextual study of His verses clearly shows. All who follow His works do so at their own peril. The Lord knows who are His. 2Ti2.19.

Simply put, this book denies essential truths of the Christian faith. He teaches universalism (that we don't need to be saved -- all will get there) (Ch.13), denies the reality of hell (Ch. 15), tinkers with the Fatherhood of God (as in The Shack) (Ch. 7), denies that sin separates us from God (Ch. 27), scoffs at the sovereignty of God (Ch. 3), and denies that the atonement was unnecessary (Ch. 19).

These are not simple disagreements or petty squabblings. The Apostle Paul boldly asserted: "But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed" (Galatians 1:8–9, ESV). Mr. Young's errors strike at the heart of the Gospel message and are indeed another Gospel.

While he writes of other biblical truths in this book that agree with scripture, the heresy overshadows any of the books merits. Those truths can be found in much more orthodox books.

Paul Young is an affable guy with a great story. He'll tell you himself that story is powerful. His great story is the result of great personal pain and his experience of recovery. "Lies We Believe" is a book that rebrands the theology of "The Shack" as doctrine. What would Mr. Young think if I told him that I've read both this book and "The Shack" and watched several of his lengthy interviews - and now I can tell his story better than he can. I have more insight into who he is and how he got this way than he does. In other words, I'm now more of an authority on Paul Young than Paul Young is. In fact, I can make Paul Young an even more likable guy. I can make people feel comfortable with him and trust him. I can correct the record on Paul Young because he kinda messed it up himself.

That's precisely the theology of "The Shack" and the point of this book; creating doctrine from fiction. God told His story so badly that folks got the wrong idea. Young intends to correct the record. Young is brilliant. He is a manipulator. That's the beauty of being a great story-teller. The fiction becomes more real than the fact.

"To understand who God really is, you can begin by looking at yourself, since you are made in God’s image." Young believes that God is explained by humans, not the reverse. The Bible got it wrong.

The author anticipates a question after giving his concept of salvation. "Are you suggesting that everyone is saved? That you believe in universal salvation? That is exactly what I am saying!" Yep, God saves everyone. No matter what. No questions asked. Because God is "especially fond" of everyone. It's odd that Mr. Young seems so attached to Jesus since He really wasn't necessary. Mr. Young doesn't say it quite as bluntly, but if God saves everyone anyway, what was the point of the Cross?

There are some wonderful messages in "Lies We Believe." There is also a mountain of presumption. The author figured out who God had to be to make him feel whole and loved. Okay, that's his business and none of mine. But he insists that his ideas (not scriptural) must therefore apply to God and everyone else because it is his "truth."

"God submits rather than controls and joins us in the resulting mess of relationship, to participate in co-creating the possibility of life, even in the face of death." I find that a cumbersome but colorful sentence and one example where the author repeatedly opines that God really can't do much without us. Young refers to the amazing power of words, using "Let there be light" as an example. Yet somehow that same Creator "God is a God of relationship and never acts independently."

The author uses circular reasoning to justify his philosophy. Wisely, he also leaves the door open to change his mind and his opinion later. So much for theology. Young is an emotional man. He appears to be a caring man. He wrote "The Shack" at his wife's request so his children would have a better way to understand how their father thinks and processes relationship. He says he never sought the fame or fortune from sharing his personal crucible.

So why did he write a book of theology? This book is currently the #2 selling Christian Theology book on the planet. Readers didn't add that characterization, the author/publisher did. The excuse that "The Shack" is just a novel fails. It has become the most popular authority of who God is. That is tragic.

If you want to know who God is and what He thinks read His Word. It begins with a new heaven and new earth and ends the same way. Nothing of import was left out. Mr. Young recovered from brokenness. I'm happy for him and his family. However, expecting his truly horrifying experience to generalize to everyone is a bit cheeky. Especially when he frames his ideas as eternal truths.

Imagine the scenario in "The Shack" that wasn't written. The part where the kidnapper tortures and kills little Missy. The very act. As her blood spurted and bubbled the man pleasured in his handiwork. According to Young's theology, God/Jesus was standing right next to both the perpetrator and the small victim saying to each personally, with a good-natured grin, "I am especially fond of you." That's it. Young insists that God is always proud and never disappointed in ANY human. Ever. - - That isn't God. That's twisted.

Mr. Young is smart, approachable, practiced in the art of persuasion, and poses a threat to those who aren't as well-versed in theology, psychology, and recognizing lies wrapped in emotion-laden partial truths. Do I believe the author is authentic in his message? Yes. But that doesn't mean he's right. Does God judge? Yes. Is there Good News? Yes. Why is there Good News? Because there's Bad News. The author insists there is no bad news. In other words, there is no point to faith at all except that it makes you feel good.

If Mr. Young wouldn't agree that I can tell his story better than he can he might rethink his quest to correct the way God chose to tell His.

I didn't love The Shack by William Paul Young. I liked that it challenged me to think more deeply, but I fundamentally disagreed with a lot of the theological aspects about God as described by it. Truly the only way I made it through reading The Shack was to remind myself that it was a work of fiction. I wish I'd re-read my review of The Shack before deciding to request Lies We Believe About God, but I didn't. What I did was remember that while I didn't agree with everything William Paul Young said...it did cause me to think. And since I've been overwhelmed with a feeling of how much and how often so many people believe things about God that just flat aren't true, I was intrigued by this book. I was hoping that it would be a great reference to be able to refer people to when they misunderstand God's nature. Yet again...I was WRONG. Instead what I found was that William Paul Young himself believes quite a few lies about God.

You guys...there was SO SO SO much wrong with this book. I truly wish I could break down every single lie within this book...every single misrepresentation and present you with a rebuttal. I wish that I could, but it isn't the purpose of my blog to do so. My purpose is to review the book and what I thought about it. So I'll do my best to do so.

If you choose to believe in God there has to be a standard or a place where you receive your information about Him. You can't just make it up...although many people have. So...where do you go? Where do you find the information needed to find out who God is and what His character is like? HIS WORD. He has revealed Himself to us through His Word--The Bible. God revealed Himself and divinely inspired over 40 different authors from all manners of vocations over a period of 1500ish years using 3 different languages. For this book to be cohesive and non-contradictory is impossible without Him. Yet it is because of Him. So what I expected to find when reading Lies We Believe About God was a bunch of Scripture to back up these "lies". Instead what I found was William Paul Young quoting his own works of fiction. There are 32 references to/quotes from The Shack in Lies We Believe About God. This is not including any references to William Paul Young's other books (Eve and Cross Roads). In a 272 page book, that's roughly every 8.5 pages that he references his own book, his own thoughts as a source of information about who God is. In comparison there were roughly 14 references to New Testament Scripture within the main chapters of this book. That's roughly every 19.5 pages. So William Paul Young references his own books more than 2 times the frequency of Biblical text. (Granted, I didn't search for Old Testament Scripture references, but I also didn't cite his references to his other two books either.) He does have a chapter at the end of book that has an additional 33 references from The Bible. This means that overall the Bible is only used within Lies We Believe About God 15 more times than his own books. You guys...this is unacceptable. If you want to learn about God, you don't go to a human's work of fiction. That's no better than making things up yourself. You go to the Source. God's own Word about Himself.

There were many times when I felt like William Paul Young was arguing over semantics. Yes, I'm a firm believer that our words mean something and it is important to choose to right words in our conversation and speech so that we convey the message we mean to convey. Let's take one chapter titled "God is disappointed in me." He argues that there is a difference between disappointment and grief. "Disappointment largely revolves around expectations and imagination. I expect you to act a certain way, or I expect a specific outcome..." "This is precisely why God is never disappointed in you. God has no such imaginations or illusions. God knows you, completely, fully, and with unrelenting affection. You don't surprise God. God delights in you, as you delight in your own children; God also grieves for and with you when you act inside your lies and darkness--but not because God expected more of you." This is semantics. Whether we "disappoint" or "grieve" God because of our behavior, the outcome is the same. He is not pleased. Yes, He can and does still love us despite our actions, but William Paul Young is giving off the impression that it doesn't matter what you do...how you act...and I don't see how anyone who has read the Bible can come to that conclusion. In fact, if you've read the Bible, you don't get 3 chapters in (on page 3 in my own personal Bible) before man's actions make a huge impact and "grieve" God. Semantics. And this isn't the only time this happens. It happens frequently throughout this book.

In connection with my point about William Paul Young quoting and referencing himself and his own published books more frequently throughout the main body of Lies We Believe About God, I felt often times that he was just "making things up because they sounded good." There were often times when his thoughts were poetic. And that's hard because I believe that God is a poet. His Word is beautiful. His thoughts are beautiful. The magnitude of His knowledge and planning and working is beautiful. He is so multi-layered. Everything about Him from the way that He thinks and acts to His very character. He can be 100% Love while also being 100% Justice at the same time. And so there were times when the poetry of what William Paul Young suggested about God sounded good to my human ear, but when bounced against the Scripture it just didn't add up. I don't claim to know all there is to know about God. I don't claim to be perfect or to have a perfect understanding of Him, but having read The Bible cover to cover each year for the last 5 years and I'm working on my 6th straight read-through I feel pretty confident in being able to spot false teaching about God like this.

I don't want to judge his person...his heart. That's not my job or my duty or my desire. God is the judge. However, I felt like pride and arrogance were pouring from the pages of this book. Nearly every chapter felt full of both. I even read his acknowledgements where he says "I am surrounded by people who love me, but aren't impressed. Thank you!" Even though this was an attempt to appear humble, it didn't read so to me. It read falsely. Or at the very least "thank you all for not being impressed by me because I'm so impressed with myself." It's funny because I told Husband that this felt so starkly contrasted against Shaken by Tim Tebow where humility truly poured off every page. I felt like Tim Tebow is a truly humble person from his book and where he might struggle with pride, the effort to crush it was palpable. And this is not the same vibe that I got from William Paul Young.

I mentioned earlier the chapter at the end of Lies We Believe About God. He titles it "A Catena" which means "a connected series or chain". And ironically, because I've read The Bible from cover to cover it felt so obvious to me that these verses used to convey a specific message were pulled so completely out of context. You can use Scripture to prove just about any point sadly. The Bible even says "There is no God" (Psalm 14:1). But that's pulled out of context because the verse says "The fool says in his heart, 'There is no God.'" I think we've all witnessed how words and phrases taken out of context can give a completely unintended and false meaning. Watch any court TV show where a witness's words are twisted by a stealthy lawyer. You'll see it happen. I told Husband that reading those series of verses, Words from God's mouth, strung together out of context made my stomach hurt. Seeing God's Word twisted to mean something that it doesn't...it made those words ugly. And the sad part is that someone who might not know better could be misled by them. Context is so important. I myself have used a verse here and there to prove a point, and I don't know that doing so is wrong if you're not using those verses to make a point outside of what Scripture as a whole harmonizes to say. Yet the person unfamiliar with the Bible and what the context should be would never know. This is why reading it (the Bible) for yourself is so important. It is crucial. Not just taking the word of a preacher or family member. Definitely not taking the opinion of an unbeliever who might have "thoughts" about God and who He is and how He thinks. And not even taking the word of someone who appears to know much about God. You have to search and read the Bible for yourself.

I feel certain that there was much more that I wanted to say about William Paul Young and Lies We Believe About God, but what it truly boils down to is "this man does not know God." Don't read this book to learn about God. Read The Bible. William Paul Young references his own (FICTION) books more frequently throughout the meat of Lies We Believe About God than he does any other source--especially The Bible. This is not the book, nor the man, to go to if you want to know God. And I personally won't be reading any more of his work myself. Lies We Believe About God gets 1 Star. Have you read Lies We Believe About God? What did you think? Let me know!

Life changing, freeing, identity confirming!

May all of Papa's kids discover the truth of their true identity in disarming the lies that were embedded by religion.

Thank you so much W M Paul Young!

WM. Paul Young, Lies We Believe About God, New York: Atria Books, 2017, 273 pp. $13.48

Lies We Believe About God is the latest book from the author of The Shack, WM. Paul Young. The author originally penned The Shack at the request of his wife as a Christmas gift to his six children. First published in 2007, this book has sold over 20 million copies and was recently unveiled as a feature film.

The Shack struck a central chord in people, many of whom confess that the storyline helped them overcome personal pain and tragedy, what the author refers to as, the Great Sadness. Wes Yoder, who endorses The Shack summarizes the ideas in this story. He writes, “The Shack is a beautiful story of how God comes to find us in the midst of our sorrows, trapped by disappointments, betrayed by our own presumptions.” Eugene Peterson adds, “This book has the potential to do for our generation what John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress did for his. It’s that good.”

But many reviewers of The Shack were less sympathetic. In the minds of some, the nature of God was compromised and the boundaries of orthodoxy were broached. But since The Shack is a novel, the line between fact and fiction became blurred and the theological intentions of the author were difficult to discern.

Young’s most recent offering, Lies We Believe About God, puts to rest any speculation about his views of God and Christian theology. The truly impressive feature about Young’s most recent offering is its transparency and honesty. The author presents twenty-eight “lies we believe about God” in terms that are unmistakable. Readers will no longer be able to sweep the theological statements in Young’s previous novels under the carpet. His views concerning God are set forth in plain terms, giving readers a better understanding of what was proposed in his previous novels.

The question for discerning readers to ask is whether or not Young’s views measure up to the scrutiny of God’s Word. Three critical areas of concern surface in the book, Lies We Believe About God.

A Flawed View of God

It is a great irony that a book which sets out to challenge the so-called “lies we believe about God,”does in fact, promote views of God that fail to match the biblical record. First, Young promotes a soft view of God. Specifically, he argues that God is not in control.

Instead of accepting God’s will of decree which is settled in eternity past, the author questions God’s sovereign control: “Does God have a wonderful plan for our lives? Does God sit and draw up a perfect will for you and me on some cosmic drafting table, a perfect plan that requires a perfect response? If God then left to react to our stupidity or deafness or blindness or inability, as we constantly violate perfection through our own presumption?”1 John, one of the characters in Young’s novel, Eve concurs: “When it comes to plans and purposes, God is not a Draftsman but an Artist, and God will not be God apart from us.”2

Instead of accepting a sovereign God who ordains everything that comes to pass, Young posits a God who reigns by love and relationship alone. “The sovereignty of God is not about deterministic control … Love and relationship trump control every time. Forced love is no love at all,”3 writes the author.

Yet, Scripture contradicts what Young would have us believe. The Bible presents a God who exercises control in creation, providence, and miracles. Proverbs 21:1 illustrates the control of God in vivid terms: “The king’s heart is a stream of water in the hand of the LORD; he turns it wherever he will.” In Ezra 6:22, the LORD “turned the heart of the king of Assyria.” In Ecclesiastes 7:13-14, God’s providential control over all things is clearly illustrated: “Consider the work of God: who can make straight what he has made crooked? In the day of prosperity be joyful, and in the day of adversity consider: God has made the one as well as the other, so that man may not find out anything that will be after him.” And Ephesians 1:11 shows us the overarching purposes of our God: “In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will.” Indeed, God exercises sovereign control over all things.

The Westminster Catechism argues, “The decrees of God are his eternal purpose, according to the counsel of his will, whereby for his own glory he hath foreordained whatsoever comes to pass.” That is, God is the sovereign king who does as he pleases (Ps. 115:3). God reigns (Ps. 99:1-5). His control knows no boundaries. God acts in order to advance his glory (Exod. 14:4). And we rest in the infinite wisdom of God’s plan, knowing that his purposes can never be thwarted (Isa. 46:9-10; Job 42:2).

Charles Hodge has a sharp disagreement with the soft view of God presented in Lies We Believe About God. Hodge argues,

“This is the end which our Lord proposed to himself. He did everything for the glory of God; and for this end, all his followers are required to live and act … If we make the good of the creature the ultimate object of all God’s works, then we subordinate God to the creature, and endless confusion and unavoidable error are the consequence. It is characteristic of the Bible that it places God first, and the good of the creation second.”4

The errors which result from promoting a God who is not fully in control, as Hodge maintains, will have serious consequences and have tragic consequences on one’s perception of God.

Second, Young presents a God who submits to people. The notion that God submits to the creature emerges in The Shack as well. The Holy Spirit figure, Sarayu, tells Mack, “We have limited ourselves out of respect for you … Relationships are never about power, and one way to avoid the will to power is to choose to limit oneself.”5 And Papa sympathetically responds to Mack who is reluctant to demonstrate emotion: “That’s okay, we’ll do things on your terms and time.”6

The Jesus of The Shack confesses to Mack, “Submission is not about authority and it is not obedience; it is all about relationships of love and respect. In fact, we are submitted to you in the same way.”7

In Young’s novel, Eve, Adonai says to Adam, “Our Love will not withhold from you the consequences of your choices. We honor and respect you, so We consent and submit to you” (emphasis mine).8 Later in the story, Adonai makes a similar remark to Lily: “Look up and into My face. I am here and will never leave you. In any dance you sometimes lead, but always both submit. So now, dear Lilly, you must choose, and I submit to you.”9

In Lies We Believe About God, the author maintains that the word control is not a part of God’s vocabulary: “God submits,” writes Young “rather than controls and joins us in the resulting mess of relationship, to participate in co-creating the possibility of life, even in the face of death.”10

Yet, we never find God submitting to the creature in Scripture. To the contrary, the creature submits to the Creator. Job learned a quick lesson when he tried to turn the tables on God. He learned the importance of submitting to God, not the other way around (Job 38-41).

John Frame helps us understand the importance of God’s authority and the proper response of the creature: “The first thing, and in one sense the only thing, we need to know about God is that he is Lord …This is a confession of lordship: that Yahweh, the Lord, is the one and only true God, and that therefore he deserves all of our love and allegiance.”11

The soft view of God who submits to the creature must be rejected as it fails to stand the test of biblical faithfulness.

A Fallacious View of Humanity

Young rightly holds that humans are created by God in the imago Dei. Since humans are created in God’s image, they have inherent worth and significance. The author should be commended for highlighting this important aspect of anthropology, which admittedly, is neglected by some Christians.

Additionally, the author believes that humans are sinners. However, sin is redefined and fails to measure up to the biblical test. “Blind, not depraved, is our condition,”12 writes Young. He continues, “Sin, then, is anything that negates or diminishes or misrepresents the truth of who you are, no matter how pretty or ugly that is.”13 Such a view find no biblical support and is a foreign concept in Christian theology.

Young acknowledges that sin involves “missing the mark.” But he adds, “The mark is not perfect moral behavior. The ‘mark’ is the Truth of your being.”14 But Young goes one step further in his redefinition of sin: “And what does the truth of your being look like? God. You are made in the image of God, and the truth of your being looks like God.”15

Now that Young his redefined, sin, he is in a position to pose an additional question: Does sin separate us from God? Young argues that the notion of sinners being separated from God is a lie: “A lot of ‘my people’ will believe that the following statement is in the Bible, but it isn’t: ’You have sinned, and you are separated from God.’” 16 The biblical proof he offers is Romans 8:38-39, that is, “nothing can separate us from the love of God.” Such an explanation, however, fails to consider the context of Romans 8 which is a clear promise to the elect of God, not the entirety of the human race.

Two responses are in order. First, Young’s reformulation of sin is inadequate as the Bible clearly teaches that all people are sinners by nature and choice. John MacArthur sheds light on the real meaning of sin:

“Sin must be understood from a theocentric or God-centered standpoint. At its core, sin is a violation of the Creator-creature relationship. Man only exists because God made him, and man is in every sense obligated to serve his Creator. Sin causes man to assume the role of God and to assert autonomy for himself apart from the Creator. The most all-encompassing view of sin’s mainspring, therefore, is the demand for autonomy.”17

When sin is redefined from a man-centered viewpoint, this only strengthens the resolve of his quest for autonomy. Yet this is exactly what we find in Young’s version of sin – a Creator catering to the needs of the creature and satisfying his autonomous bent.

The Scriptures paint a portrait of sinful creatures which is undeniable and devastating: “The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” (Gen. 6:5, ESV) Indeed, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?” (Jer. 17:9, ESV) Edwin Palmer writes, “Total depravity means that natural man is never able to do any good that is fundamentally pleasing to God, and, in fact, does evil all the time.”18 The biblical evidence for total depravity is overwhelming and conclusive (Ps. 51:5; Isa. 53:6; 64:6; Eph. 2:1-3; Rom. 3:23; 5:12).

Second, the Bible clearly teaches that sinners are separated from God. Apart from grace, sinners are without hope and are utterly cut off and separated from God. Isaiah 59:2 says, “But your iniquities have made a separation between you and your God, and your sins have hidden his face from you so that he does not hear.” In his letter to the Ephesians, Paul demonstrates that sinners are separated from Christ. He refers to them as “having no hope and without God in the world” (Eph. 2:12). Our only hope, then, is found in Christ alone who came to forgive us and reconcile us to a holy God (Eph. 2:13-22).

A Faulty View of Salvation

Two major problems can be summarized here. First, Young promotes universal reconciliation. In The Shack, Papa answers Mack’s questions concerning the efficacy of the cross. Papa says, “Honey, you asked me what Jesus accomplished on the cross; so now listen to me carefully: through his death and resurrection, I am now fully reconciled to the world.”19 Mack asks, “The whole world? You mean those who believe in you, right?”20 Papa answers with resolutely, “The whole world, Mack. All I am telling you is that reconciliation is a two-way street, and I have done my part, totally, completely, finally.”21

In a stunning admission, Young says,

“The Good News is not that Jesus opened up the possibility of salvation and you have been invited to receive Jesus into your life. The Gospel is that Jesus has already included you into His life, into His relationship with God the Father, and into His anointing in the Holy Spirit … God has acted decisively and universally for all humankind.”22

If there is any question about the universalism here, the author removes any cause for doubt: “Are you suggesting that everyone is saved? That you believe in universal salvation? That is exactly what I am saying?”23 He continues, “Here’s the truth: every person who has ever been conceived was included in the death, burial, and resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. When Jesus was lifted up, God ‘dragged’ all human beings to Himself.24

The Bible paints a very different portrait. The Bible speaks of people apart from grace who are enemies of God (Col. 1:21; Rom. 5:10) and children of wrath (Eph. 2:1-3). Only the redeemed are reconciled to God.

Appealing to passages like John 12:32 is insufficient and fails to build the case for universal reconciliation. Jesus says, “And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.” All people must either mean “all without exception” or “all without distinction.” As we compare Scripture with Scripture, clearly the later is in view.

Jesus proclaims, “Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few” (Matt. 7:13-14). ). Jesus speaks of two trees, the healthy and the diseased. Speaking of the diseased tree, Jesus says, “Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire” (Matt. 7:19). Moreover, Jesus teaches about two kinds of houses, the one that is built on the rock and one that is built on the sand. “And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it tell, and great was the fall of it” (Matt. 7:26-27). Indeed, every person who refuses to build his “house” on the rock and build his or her life on the promises of God; every person who rejects the Son and his work on the cross will endure an eternity of wrath (John 3:36; Rom. 2:8; 2 Thes. 1:9). “At the end of the day, there are only two ways – the way of the kingdom or the way of death.” Scripture is clear: not everyone will pursue the way of the kingdom. Universal reconciliation is a lie.

Second, Young argues that the cross was not God’s idea. The author poses the question, “Who originated the Cross?” Young’s answer is disturbing, to say the least: “If God did, then we worship a cosmic abuser, who in Divine wisdom created a means to torture human beings in the most painful and abhorrent manner … Better no god at all, than this one.”25 In a few words, the author not only repudiates the reality of God’s involvement in the cross of Christ; he casts aside penal substitutionary atonement.

The apostle Paul speaks of the power of the cross (1 Cor. 1:17-18), “making peace by the blood of his cross (Col. 1:20) and even boasts in the cross (Gal. 6:14). However, Young says, “Nothing not even the salvation of the entire cosmos, could ever justify a horrific torture device called a cross.”26

When we contrast the Bible with Young’s view, we find that the cross was God’s idea after all. Two passages in the book of Acts show the sovereignty of God in salvation and demonstrate God’s involvement in the cross from start to finish:

“this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men. God raised him up, loosing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to be held by it.” (Acts 2:23–24, ESV)

“for truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place.” (Acts 4:27–28, ESV)

The faulty view of salvation which is promoted in Lies We Believe About God is deeply troubling and must be rejected by discerning Christians.

Conclusion

Paul Young has shared openly and honestly about some of the hurts in his life. Pain and suffering, while inevitable in this life are regrettable realities. The dark night of the soul will likely affect most of us. And so we sympathize with Young and his Great Sadness and pray that God will minister in deep and abiding ways. But no amount of personal tragedy or loss can excuse the propagation of false views of God.

It is a great tragedy when an author writes a book that minimizes God or misrepresents God. A.W. Tozer helps us understand the importance of understanding God rightly: “Worship is pure or base as the worshipper entertains high or low thoughts of God.”27 How we think about God matters! For “there is nothing more important than knowing God.”28 Our view concerning his essence and attributes is not a mere academic debate among theologians. Our view of God affects how we approach him and how we worship him. Tozer continues, “For this reason the gravest question before the Church is always God himself, and the most portentous fact about any man is not what he at a given time may say or do, but what he in his deep heart conceives God to be like.”29

“God does not lower his standards to accommodate us.”30 Therefore, our responsibility is to view God rightly, worship God rightly, and approach God rightly and reverently. Indeed, “What comes into our minds when we think about God is the most important thing about us.”31

The chief problem in Lies We Believe About God is an undermining of biblical authority. It ultimately caters to the creature and encourages the autonomy that he craves. When the authority of the Bible is compromised the people of God always pay a price. It’s not too late to get unshackled. True freedom is found in submitting to Scripture, trusting and obeying Jesus Christ, and worshipping God in the way that he demands!

Ibid, Loc. 329. ↩
WM. Paul Young, Eve (New York: Howard Books, 2015), 181. ↩
Ibid, Loc. 347. ↩
Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology – Volume I (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, reprint 1995), 536. ↩
Young, The Shack, 106. ↩
Ibid, 83. ↩
Ibid, 145. ↩
WM. Paul Young, Eve (New York: Howard Books, 2015), 239. ↩
Ibid, 258. ↩
Young, Lies We Believe About God, Loc. 355. ↩
John Frame, The Doctrine of God (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed, 2002), 21-22. ↩
WM. Paul Young, Lies We Believe About God (New York: Atria Books, 2017), Loc. 296. ↩
Ibid, Loc. 1645. ↩
Ibid, Loc. 1643. ↩
Ibid, Loc. 1645. ↩
Ibid, Loc. 1663. ↩
John MacArthur and Richard Mahue, Biblical Doctrine: A Systematic Summary of Bible Truth (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2017), 453. ↩
Edwin H. Palmer, The Five Points of Calvinism (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1972), 13. ↩
William P. Young, The Shack (Newbury Park: Windblown Media, 2007), 82. ↩
Ibid. ↩
Ibid. ↩
Young, Lies We Believe About God, Loc. 889. ↩
Ibid, Loc. 898. ↩
Ibid. ↩
Ibid, Loc. 1101. ↩
Ibid, 329. ↩
A.W. Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy (San Francisco: HarperCollins Publishers, 1961), 1. ↩
John Frame, The Doctrine of God (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed, 2002), 1. ↩
A.W. Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy, 1. ↩
R.C. Sproul, The Holiness of God (Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers, 1995), 88. ↩
Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy, 1. ↩

The author writes in Chapter 27: “You have sinned, and you are separated from God” is not in the Bible. Based on the title of his book, this is a lie we believe about God.

But here is the truth:
Isaiah 59:2 states “But your iniquities (sins) have separated you from your God; your sins have hidden his face from you so that he will not hear.”
There is great danger in leaning toward our own understanding (hopeful speculations) versus the truth of God’s Word. (Proverbs 3:5,7)
God IS loving, but He is also Holy and just. He gave us His Word, the Bible, to follow as truth. To those who believe the sacrifice of God’s Son Jesus was necessary to save us from our sins and to restore our relationship with Him, He gives His Holy Spirit to reveal truth AND to keep us from being deceived.
To give a false hope that God will change His mind later if an unbeliever changes his/her mind after death is not biblical. If that were true, why would Jesus’ death have been necessary at all?
It is wise to prayerfully read and study the entire Bible instead of listening to others thoughts and opinions, as wonderful and enlightening as those ideas may seem.
The eternal consequences are too important to risk trusting human speculation.

I've read all of William Paul Young's books and am consistently challenged in my thinking. I enjoyed this book specifically because I was poked and prodded to think about what I'm thinking about. The "lies" about God highlighted in this book are real and hidden within our own views and beliefs about the Trinity. Every time I read a book by Mr. Young, I love Jesus more. I feel totally and relentlessly pursued and loved. In order to obtain the freedom that I desire, I need to review where I am believing wrong. Thank you William Paul Young for turning my spiritual paradigm upside-down and inside-out. You are an enormous gift to the world!

I would like to start off by saying that I only read chapter three. To be honest, that was enough to make me put the book back and write this critique of that chapter specifically which talks about the "lie" that God is in control. WM Paul Young severely limits the sovereignty of God by believing that He does not have control over our lives or anything at all for that matter. Young devotes a whole chapter to assert these claims about God in this book. In this chapter he uses suffering as an example as to why he believes God is not in control. On page 39 he says that, " Nothing, not even the salvation of the entire cosmos, could ever justify a horrific torture device called a 'cross'." In his attempt to justify his point he completely overlooks the bigger point that the cross itself exemplifies. Here we are shown that God does and can use pain for a purpose. The Lord was in complete control when Jesus died on the cross. He had a purpose in using Christ's blood which was to cover our sins. It serves as a perfect reminder of how God brings together all things for our ultimate good. (Romans 8:28). What seems to me, however, to be the most telling is that Young doesn't reference scripture at all to back up his claims. This would seem to suggest that it's because his claims themselves are not biblical. The last thing I would add is how detrimental this false teaching could be to those who are new believers. For this to be parading around as Christian material is completely deceitful and should therefore be disregarded.

Depending on how you responded to The Shack, Crossroads, and Eve, you will either resonate with this non-fiction book by Young or you will not dare to read it for fear of heresy.

I remember when The Shack came out and people either hated it for what they called false teaching, or they loved it because of the presentation of God interacting with a hurting father.

Me? I was more in the lines of, "eh there are good parts and some parts that I wasn't too sure on."

That was my feeling when reading this book. There were parts when I was nodding and thinking, "this is pretty good stuff" and then he would write something that felt like it took a sharp turn to the right or left and I was left thinking, "Why did you go and do that?"

There are some really good thoughts in this book about some bizarre and hurtful beliefs about God that people have adopted. Young does a fantastic job at going deep in this words and evoking depth without sounding like a college professor.

Then there are some serious questionable aspects to this book as well. It's almost like Young is toeing the line of what you typically think about God and then slightly pulling on the theology string to get people to ponder their held beliefs.

It is a good book to read and digest and discuss. So in that aspect, this is a good read. But I would add the warning that some of his conclusions are a bit off base for me.

There is no need to offer a lengthy review. Several good ones have already been submitted, it seems. Still, I have one question: Why would any Christian want to read anything by an unabashed universalist (see the chapter entitled "You Need to Be Saved")? This man claims to be debunking "lies we believe about God," yet his entire theology is a lie that not only stands contrary to the entirety of Christian orthodoxy throughout history, but stands entirely at odds with Scripture. There is so much wholesome Christian works of theology outside of the Canon of Scripture; what in the world does this add (aside from what it obviously detracts)?

I'm not a thologist so this is going to be in plain layman terms. I was fine with Young's writing in The Shack and Eve. They were both clearly fiction so there wasn't a lot to be argued as far as theology. I admit that in The Shack there were some things that could possibly be interpreted as universalism but it was vague and could be argued either way as to whether the author truly meant to advocate it. This book clearly take away any doubts of Young's stance. I was fine with reading this until I got to the chapter "You Need To Get Saved" which Young believes is a lie. He brings up the loving part of God but totally leaves out the holy portion of God. I just couldn't read anymore after his failed argument that everyone, even those who willingly reject Jesus's sacrifice, are "saved". It's a shame because now it makes me question Young's purpose in The Shack when I HAD found it inspirational. I will give him credit in the fact he is brave enough to not hide his beliefs and is clear on what he believes if if it is wrong.

I get that a lot of grumpy Gus's are her because their pastor told them the end times were coming, but as a person who actually read the book (well, it was an audible purchase, but you know) I wan to say that this was magnificent. What a wonderful encouraging, biblically based look at who God is and who He isn't. (Surprise: the evangelical american church gets some things wrong.) If you're open to thinking outside the box and you won't get kicked out of bible study for asking hard questions, this book is for you .

In his past books, Young has used fiction to illustrate a vibrant relationship with the Trinity, with Adonai, with reconciling our Great Sadness. I have appreciated much of what he has said. There are phrases from all of his books that have stuck with me and been encouraging and led me toward the Father.

So, with that said, this is not a personal attack on Young at all. I think, in fact, that if we ran into each other at the diner one day, we'd enjoy one another's company immensely.

But, y'all, this book made me cry. It's so almost right and so off at the same time. It sounds good. So good that I'd WANT it to be right. But it doesn't match Scripture. It just doesn't. You can twist and turn and dance around the subject, but Young's version of god is not the God I know.

I loved so many parts of The Shack. I grabbed a few treasured things from Eve. But The Shack left me slightly uneasy and Eve was downright unbiblical. Yet, I tried to give grace because they were fiction and who knows what someone means to be a theological statement and just part of the story line?

Unfortunately, this book doesn't leave any doubts on what Young meant as theological statements. And many are incorrect. There are other reviews here that detail them more specifically.

I pray that Young's novel, The Shack, continues to show people a picture of the God who is "especially fond" of His children. And I pray that eventually Young will be able to reconciled his views of what he "wants" God to be with who God truly is.

Very disappointed & returned this book. I ordered it when the author was on Trinity Broadcasting, VERY surprised the Paul Crouch is ok with this theology, I believe it's very dangerous!!!! I can understand why the author's mother was upset with him, she should be for spreading false info!

I would rate this book five stars for content and one star for media. The author has produced a very interesting book. The problem is that the MP3 CDs are defective. I have purchased this twice now, and both sets cannot be copied to my iPod because of disc flaws. Both have crashed in the same two spots, so this is not a random problem but a manufacturing problem.

Paul Young is a great storyteller. He has been criticized for that by some reviewers. As I have read their arguments I could not help but pause and think about the fact we are all "storytellers," and our personal story comes from our own personal context. Some would like to believe that they see God's story through unbiased, strictly objective eyes; how naïve and presumptuous. Frankly, I found it quite refreshing to finally have someone shake off the shackles of traditional religious theology since so much of it has not the faintest glimmer of relevance to the world of reality. I do not agree that Mr. Young is trying to remold the foundational structure of Christian belief nor do I believe that he thinks, "God got it wrong." I do believe that many ancient storytellers often gave God credit for things He never did and placed into God's mouth words He never said. If you would like to peak into the world of a personal God, one that in His own mysterious way embraces mankind along every trail of life then read the book.

Lies Wm. Paul Young believes about God is a more accurate title. A very dangerous book for those that haven't studied Gods word or are young in their faith. His assertion that we do not need salvation is mind-boggling. He proceeds to take a few scriptures out of context and ignores many others that stand contrary to his assertion. I'm not arguing the merits of Christianity or its validity,( though I believe in both ). What I am saying is if one compares his statements about universal salvation that he says we are all due regardless of what we believe.. it just doesnt match up with what the Word of God says. The book is fiction.

Just read this with loving eyes. You will see that this is NOT inconsistent with Biblical truth, though it is inconsistent with most human religious structures. This book will make you think, and it will make you a better disciple.

It's a tragedy that this book is being published as a Christian book and sold in Christian book stores. It makes you wonder if the author ever had a concept of God that is actually portrayed in the Bible. The title should have been called "Lies About God for the Emerging Apostate Church." I pray that the light of the truth of the gospel will prevail in the hearts and minds of all who read and they will discover the truth in the infallible Word of God. Any correct doctrine is overridden by the Gospel According to Paul Young. Reader beware!

You can't know your Bible and possibly believe this. "Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it. Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves" (Matt. 7:13-15). "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths" (2 Tim. 4:3-4).

A few years ago, I was gushing about Danny Silk's excellent book Keep Your Love On. It was his magnum opus, such a simple, readable melding of so many principles. I told many, many people it was the best book you could read (outside the Bible).

I am only halfway through this book, but it has completely replaced Keep Your Love On as my go-to recommendation. Wm. Paul Young does a brilliant job of unmasking religion and revealing a God who is love.

Amazing book! Very well written. And I love how it's personal experience unveiling true revelation. It definitely hits home! There was much confirmation for me in the pages of this book. Great job, Wm. Paul Young!

Mr. Young tries really hard to transfer his theology from his novels to this work of non-fiction. I won't say that he doesn't bring up some interesting ideas but so many of them lack good theological grounding. I was tempted to call it religious pablum but I think that may be a bit harsh--more like God-light. I appreciate his attempt to bring more of God's love and mercy to the fore in Christian thinking but sometimes his chapters seem to address an issue so cursorily that i just can't buy his thesis. Yes, many Christians struggle with the concept of Hell and how God could allow people to suffer indefinitely. Young tries to show that this could never happen--I hope he is right.

Young should continue to focus on his fiction and leave theological musings to those better trained.

Short book, but I found that it contains a lot of truths exposing the lies about God that many American Christians believe. Ideally for people who haven't studied theology much, but still enjoyable for people who have. Paul Young always writes with grace and insight.

I'm not really sure where to start...and it's hard to find the words to describe all I feel about this book. After reading the Shack several years ago, I felt I'd met a kindred spirit in Paul Young. A man who understood the depths to which God will go to heal a broken heart. My heart had been so deeply broken from childhood abuse...and the message of the Father's love brought tremendous healing to my life. The Shack echoed so much I held dear, and though theological quirks were definitely there, I dismissed them as mere creative license allowed in a fiction. Though there were some things I didn't totally agree with, I developed a trust and respect for Paul. Which is what I suspect many others would do: respect him...and trust him. Enough to invite him into their hearts again by reading this book.

I'll admit, I had heard a few negative things about the book before I read it, which is why I needed to read it for myself. And...to me, reading a book is somewhat like inviting an author into my home. So, opening this book was like opening the door to Paul and inviting him in to chat over coffee and a snack. But I've got to tell you...by no more than 40 pages in, I discovered that reading the book was like visiting with a crazy person you pray is only joking. Except he's not. He is dead serious. And to add to the crazy talk, it doesn't take long for him to start making a total mess of things in "my house." After saying a few comforting things (trying to assure me everything was going to be just fine) he walks over to a bookshelf where I have my most prized family heirlooms on display --antiques that have been authenticated time and time again by professionals--those trained in the field of authenticating these types of things. Paul picks up a few of my treasures, looks them over, and gently returns them to their places. He likes those. But the rest he holds up to me, telling me they are nothing but thrift store rubbish, and then throws them to the floor where they shatter into pieces. Of course, he is not qualified at all to re-define the value of my heirlooms. He just doesn't like them. They don't fit the decor of his home, so he doesn't want me to have them in mine.

That little story is only an analogy (obvious, I'm sure), and in it my heirlooms represent the historic, orthodox Christian doctrines that have been precious to me (and so many) for years. Doctrines that have been established since the disciples set out upon the Great Commission. Doctrines Young dismantles one by one, often by erecting straw men as a diversion and then using his former book, The Shack, far more often than the Bible to bolster and justify his custom-fitting of the gospel. What little biblical data he does call upon is rarely more than craftily placed proof texts built upon weak (if not deceptive) exegesis. But...he throws those heirlooms to the floor with such whimsy and neighborly cajoling that readers will hardly know what's happening. And just when you figure out something you've held so dear has just been seriously damaged--and before you can catch your breath long enough to demand a thorough explanation--he's on to the next heirloom destroying it.

I honestly don't think Paul realizes this is what he's doing. At least I sure hope he doesn't. I think he really believes he's doing us all a favor rewriting the entire meta narrative of the Bible the way he does. He really thinks he's given us a much better story to live by. But I don't. In fact the story he writes leaves me feeling empty. Leaves my life as a Christ-follower seemingly meaningless. After all, according to Paul, we're all saved, and we're all good children of God (aside from the fact that we're all so evil we nailed Jesus to a Cross--a Cross that was never God's idea but merely something Jesus rolled His eyes and "submitted to" as if saying, "Those silly humans...I guess I'll appease their blood thirst.")

I will say there are a few "lies" Paul writes about that I actually do agree with. I agree that a religious check list is not what living for Jesus is all about. I agree that God wants relationship with us more than anything we can do for Him. And I agree that we have misconceptions about the Father that can really get in the way of our freedom and abundance. But most of this book I'd truly call heresy. When you dismantle the Cross and erase my need for a Savior, you're not really talking about Christianity anymore. I'm so sorry Paul. I really, truly wish you were joking.

This book misses the opportunity built into the title. The author claims to have grown into one who is rational about the ideas we have about god, but he misses the chance to critically question the rational basis for belief in any god. The title provides the chance to ask about the social construct that some call god/religion. All the commentary about the validity of the points in this book are akin to the questions about the number of angles that can dance on the head of a pin. This is a good title, but boring content. This book will appeal only to those who's concept of an enlightened world view is between fundamentalism and rational evidence based reasoning.

This book's release at the same time as the movie's release clears up any question out there as to whether the author desires to shape Christian thought and doctrine. Many have questioned over the years whether The Shack should be viewed as only a fiction work - not a doctrinal statement. I bought the Kindle copy yesterday to let the author clear that question up for me himself. Now I know what he believes. His departure from Orthodox theology is quite apparent. If you are a young Christian or non-Christian I encourage you to seek mature godly counsel before you take the ideas of this book as a fact!

Read the book "LIES PAUL YOUNG BELIEVES ABOUT GOD" by James B. DeYoung. You will find truth and inspiration for your journey, and understand the heresy of Paul Young's theology. Paul Young had a sad childhood and is wrestling with his own unresolved issues.

Okay. If a Muslim said he didn't believe in the 5 tenants of Islam or that the Quran is entirely true, he would be free to do that but should be clear he is not a Muslim. For his claims to be reasonable and helpful to his readers, he ought to appeal good, scholarly work and not just express personal opinion or create straw men and knock them down with poor reasoning.

Sadly, Paul Young has missed his opportunity as a popular fiction writer to express the love and grace of historical, orthodox Christianity as the great hope of all people . . . or to declare himself as no Christian (that is a person who believes in and lives by Jesus' teachings). Young believes in universal salvation of all people. While that is an understandable wish, do we think Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Idi Amin et al should get a free pass? Jesus said, "Strive to enter through the narrow door; for many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able." Young dismisses hell as a reality (certainly if all people go to heaven). Jesus said, "The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth," and "if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into hell, ‘where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.’" While we may not wish it to be that way, we must acknowledge it is truly what the Bible records although we may not wish to believe it. THat doesn't make it a "lie". we only say that we don't WANT to accept it.

Young tells his readers that it is a lie to believe people are sinful (you don't need a Bible to dispel this. Just look at Syria or your pick of a suffering part of the planet), Jesus' death on the cross was planned by God and he even calls it "child sacrifice" (forget all the prophecies ), God is in control (throw out all the Bible stories and teaching in this regard), people need to get saved, sin separates us from God. etc. Remember, Young tells us these are all lies. Based on what? He selectively quotes from scripture, and uses false analogies. For example, to call the cross "child sacrifice," Young completely glosses over that Jesus, as an adult, said that He (Jesus) had the right to lay down His life and to take it up again. (John 10:18). We all admire our men and women who have laid down their lives to keep our nation free and protect innocent life. We praise their sacrifice and call them heroes. We should rightly call down someone deriding their ultimate love as "child sacrifice."

Better title: "Paul Young's Personal Opinions that Differ from the Bible." Naw. Wouldn't be a best seller then. But at least it would TRUE.

William Paul Young unveils the fact that he is an "optimistic universalist" (in his own words), and his personal theology flies in the face of what we read in Romans and Ephesians, if not the rest of the whole of Scripture. Unfortunately we live in a day when heresies are incapable of being deemed so. My fear is so many Shack fans blindly fall in love with this book without testing it by the study of Scripture, and are accepting a theology of a different god, a different Christ, a different gospel--one that is ineffectual to save.

William P. Young - successfully making disciples of his fake Jesus. You can now read his book "Lies We Believe About God" to understand the full theology of the Shack.

I did buy and listen to the book on Audible.

Wow..now we can finally reject Christ and don’t have to worry about going to hell why? Cause there is no literal hell..there is no sin and everyone will spend eternity in heaven..EVERYONE..that’s wonderful new age thinking..only problem? It’s not biblical..this is Pauls opinion..Read and study the Bible for yourselves and please stop depending on man to “teach” you who God is...Jesus himself said “ you shall know the truth and the truth will set you free”. Jesus IS the truth..

I was forced to think and evaluate things religions had pushed me to believe. If you are a truth seeker and want a candid opinion that may or may not support what you had settled to believe then this is your book. I loved it!

This book exceeded my expectations although I should have known better because Paul Young's ability to be able to communicate the heart of God to those who are ready to hear. I am grateful to have been freed from the bondage of religion and fully enjoy relationship with Papa (the Trinity) and those around me. Knowing the truth about God and who He is has made that possible. Thank you Paul Young!

Paul Young is an extraordinary writer. This book is just another example of his ability to take the mess we make of our ingrained beliefs and his knack of picking them apart to show what he sees as truth. I loved this book.
The topics he chose to use I felt were some of the more common lies we have been fed and believe, reasons for which most people can't explain. His dissection of that learned lie is also superb; particularly in the short span of the book. He doesn't digress into some theology that would lose the general readers interest. He is clear, concise and right on target. This book is a good jump off point for those who seek to understand why they may believe the way they do, and the pain they feel and yet, don't understand the why behind it.
It is as Paul so aptly tells, hard to get people to take God out of the box, without trying to shove him into yet another. It is as he said, much easier to get people to discuss what they are not (believe), rather than what they are (again believe), or in this case, their beliefs about God. Add to that his explanation of the triune. I still use that one. Simplifies things for students and everyone else and a far better reach than any scholarly approach.
It is enough to say that this book is from cover to cover one amazing read and one that should be read, no matter where you are on your journey and what your beliefs are.
I thank you Paul for your humility, wisdom, wit and honesty. Fondly.

**arc from Net Galley and Publisher in exchange for a fair review**

This book is heresy. Rather than focusing on what the Bible says, Young simply offers his opinions about what he thinks should be and offers them as truth. His book is founded in universalism and a rejection of the core Christian doctrine. This is not a man seeking out truth. This is a man seeking to make a god in his image. This book is dangerous and not worthy of your time. This is simply a man spouting off random thoughts that have no foundation whatsoever. Calling this garbage would be giving it too much credit.

This is only a review of the "Sample" not the book. I expect a Samole to be pages of the authors work, not the entire intro offered by another author. I want to know the authors writing style, how the prose flows, how he logically or poetically lays out his thinking. In considering purchase I really couldn't care less about what an Introduction by another author says. So now I'll have to be off to B/N to actually pick up the book to take a real look. Once in hand if I want it I'll likely buy it there.

The critics here are sadly entrenched in contemporary, western Christian theology. A theology that follows the writings of Augustine and Calvin and leads to a false conclusion that badly misrepresents and maligns the character and nature of our Father. It is a theology that interprets everything though a lens that He intends to torture and punish evil people. It is based on a very small number of scriptures, all of which are apocalyptic (highly symbolic) except for Jesus' story of The Rich Man and Lazarus (that has been sorely misinterpreted).

The theology of Paul Young views and interprets everything though the lens of the perfect love of a God who IS perfect love - that is His essence. A proper interpretation of the scriptures must logically start with His essence - perfect love. I do not agree with Young's view that all are already saved. The scripture clearly teaches that salvation is when one enters into the life of God by simple faith. The apostle Paul answered the question "What must I do to be saved?" by saying "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ". That fits perfectly with these words of Jesus, "Whoever believes has eternal life and will never perish". The question then is how many will believe? The Scripture says every knee will bow and every tongue confess "Jesus is Lord". The theology of modern western theology is that a person who dies without believing is eternally doomed. However, Christ (who prayed forgiveness for His murderers) holds the keys of death and the grave - what do you think He will do those keys! He will set the captive free! Christ accomplished "much more" than the first Adam (Romans chapter 5). The first Adam brought condemnation to all men. Is Adam greater than Christ? Is Jesus only able to bring salvation and divine life to only a few? No, Christ accomplished much more than Adam. He holds the keys - every knee will gladly bow - the trees along the River of Life are for the healing of the nations (the enemies of God) and the gate of New Jerusalem will NEVER be shut. New believers will continue to enter in until the curse of Adam is extinguished by the infinite merits of Christ and the perfect love of God to the glory of the Father.

So apart from that distinction, I strongly support Paul Young's view of God. It flows from Christ Himself to Paul to Origen to Gregory of Nyssa to Basil the Great to Julian of Norwich to Abraham Lincoln to George MacDonald to C.S. Lewis to Thomas Talbott to C. Baxter Kruger. NO ONE will see Him and say: "I over-estimated your love and kindness!" No, the Great Shepherd searches for the lost sheep UNTIL He finds it.

The author attempts to create a religion agreeable to his own intuition but makes no attempts to engage the scripture upon which Christianity is based, clearly because he is not competent to do so. In the process he succeeds in spewing 28 lies to dupe the ignorant.

I have a real problem with the title. He implies that if you disagree with him on a subject you are a liar. It is fair for him to have disagreements but it isn't fair for him to consider that if you disagree with him and with his, in my opinion poor interpretation of the truth of God's Word, that yo are a liar.

This text is about as anti-Christian as it could get while sounding "religious." For instance, he insists that one of the lies is that man is not good. However, scripture is replete with descriptions of man as inherently evil and sinful and in desperate need of a Savior. Don't waste your money; the bulk of the "lies" he cites are, in fact, scriptural truths. In essence, Young simply rejects scriptural truth for an age old lie that has been around for millennia. Nothing new here; same old garbage!

I was extremely shocked about one chapter and decided to return the book very SHOCKED! because I LOVE The Shack some may like it however I did not thank you....I allow my spirit to bare witness to the leading of the Holy Spirit in all things I read and if I get any yuk feeling than No! I was so disappointed not real sure where Williams thinking is going with the salvation chapter of this book, I just flipped through the pages when I first got it in and that caught my attention right off ,couldn't believe he thought this was a lie, maybe his lie about God but not mine, who I'm I to set in judgment of how another person process there thinking, I will leave that between God and them.

This could be a great addition to my kindle library if only it were all there. The last part of if chapter 6. is not there and that makes me wonder what else is left out and why. When i buy a digital book I expect it to be as complete as the printed one. This is the second time this has happened but the other one just cost me .99 so I figured I got what i paid for and did not complain. This one cost a lot more than that and is a very interesting book so when you leave out parts of it I wonder what I am missing. Now I am wondering if any of the books i bought on kindle are as complete as the printed ones. Paul Young deserves better than that.