On labor day weekend I went to Colorado with my son and a few of my friends. Going on the trip was a difficult decision because my wife had just been injured in a very low speed motorcycle incident. Now, before you start thinking that I'm a callous jerk for leaving her here, you need to know that it was her idea for me to go. She had plenty of help while I was gone, and more importantly she is a loving wife that wanted her son and her husbend to have a good time. She did have on condition, however. She wanted me to read a book.
The book she wanted me to read is called "The Shack" by William Young. It is a piece of Christian fiction. Please understand that I am not usually a fan of Christian fiction. I have never and probably will never read the Left Behind series. This is because I am not sure what I believe about all that stuff. Usually, though, I don't like Christian fiction because I feel that many mediocre writers write nominal stories under the guise "Christian" that would never be published in any other setting. So it was with this bias that Christian fiction means "marginally written" that I took the book with me to Colorado.
One other introductory note; my wife wanted me to go and to read the book because she has been concerned about me. I am not sure about all of the reasons why, but it seems that she is afraid that I am angry with God because of some difficult things going on in my life. She is partly right. I do have a lot of stuff going on right now, and I suppose that I believe that God is behind it. I also suppose that I am not happy some of the stuff going on, but angry? Maybe. Angry at God? It is just that I know he can change the stuff if he wants. Maybe, just maybe, I am more concerned that God is angry with me.
After doing a bit of research I found out that this book is causing a bit of a stir. Apparently, some of our esteemed christian leaders love this book while some others have cautioned their listeners not to read it. It seems that in William Young's portrayal of God, quite a few believers have had their feathers rustled.
Well, let's be honest. The book can rustle some feathers. Why? well primarily because of the way that God is portrayed in the book. At the beginning of the novel we find out that the principal character is a grown man named Mack whose childhood was marred by a Church leader, deacon dad who had his own set issues to face in the form of alcoholism and anger.
So, Mack grew up, went to seminary, at least for a while, and found a loving wife named Nan to share his life with. She had an intimate relationship with God became a model of intimacy for Mack. In fact, her relationship with God was so intimate that in her prayerlife, her name for God was Papa. Together Mack and Nan had several children, the youngest was a precocious sweetheart named Missy.
In the book, Missy is captured and killed by a serial killer which overwhelms Mack with more anger and depression problems. Mack refers this as his Great Sadness. Well, 3 years after his loss Mack gets a note asking him meet Papa in the shack where his daughter's bloody dress was found. Although he thinks it is a cruel joke, he goes anyway.
At the Shack, Mack meets God. Here is where a lot of the problems for our Christian leaders begin. It seems that God chooses to present himself, herself, umm, it's supreme self to Mack as a large African American Woman. After Mack Meets the large Black Woman named Papa he is greeted by a Jesus who is actually portrayed as a Middle Eastern Jew and an almost Asian female representation of the Holy Spirit named Sarayu.
I must confess that in my machismo I found it diffucult to fathom anything other than a masculine God, but trust me, William Young's story is not heretical. I read most of the story on the long drive back from Colorado and I often found myself staring out my window at the scenery not to watch the mountains fade from view, but instead to hide the tears forming in my eyes.
You see, this story let me know that I really was angry with God. I really do blame Him for much of my current situation. Now, I still blame God for the crap in my life, but this book helped frame the idea that a loving God really can allow crap to happen to someme that He loves. Crap in my life does not mean that God loves me less.
5 comments:
I enjoyed reading your review of the book. I loved it too and have been annoyed with all the theologians tearing apart a work of fiction. That has just been tiresome.
I'm glad it has helped you realize some things. The book did that for me too.
Jamie mentioned a little something about this book to me last week and also mentioned that there were some controversies surrounding God’s appearance as a black female. To be honest with you, I can’t see any other way of identifying the people who have a problem with this except to say that they are either ignorant, sexist, racist, or possibly a combination of all three.
Throughout the Bible God is described or describes himself in feminine terms; He refers to himself as a mother, as having given birth to us, and as having nursed us. He is described as being a comforter. In the original Hebrew text the word “womb” is used to describe God’s great compassion for us. In Genesis 1:27 we’re told that “God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him. Male and female he created them.” God has never shied away from describing himself or allowing himself to be described in what we would consider to be traditionally feminine terms. Furthermore, to suggest that God is “male” is to somehow try to define God in human terms. To further suggest that He is only male is to suggest that women somehow have qualities that are beyond God; qualities that He, quite literally, does not have. If you’re prepared to go there, you might want to take Mormonism for a ride.
To be honest with you Trent, it’s this very sexism that so clearly exists in the church (and has for one or two millennium) that gives me serious concerns over whether that verse in 1 Timothy was ever translated correctly to begin with! How am I to trust the definition of “women in leadership” to a bunch of men who were so distressed at the thought of femininity that they actually brought about a doctrine/understanding in the church that God was a male? I can’t. And I don’t. Once you start reading through the Bible, and actually paying attention, you see that not only is God described in female terms, but God also ordained women, through the history of the Old AND New Testaments, to “have authority” and to lead His people.
(exhale)
But I digress.
As for your revelation, it is an amazing one and one that could have only been given by a God whose nurturing spirit far exceeds anything that a male could ever deliver.
As for your wife, wow! Chocolates and flowers are owed!
A simple question: What do you do with the phrase by Papa "I am truly human, in Jesus."?
Doesn't this seem antithetical to the fact that Jesus, the Father, and the Holy Spirit are three, eternally distinct personages in one Godhead? It seems that Young is trying to bond Jesus and the Father (a term Young actually avoids using). I have read that Young teaches that the triune God exists, but he teaches a sort of blending of the natures of GOd. This is actually very unsettling to me. I'm wondering where he gets this from Scripture?
There are other issues I find troubling. Consider how submission is used instead of authority. I don't get where Young gets from Scripture that God submits to us? I know he states that submission is part of a relationship with God and God to us, but I think it is bordering on nuts to think that God omnipotent submits to our will. This comes in play, also, when he speaks of hierarchy. It seems as though Young ignores the hierarchy found with God and the angels.
I have more thoughts and concerns about this book. But, it seems that the fundamental nature of God is compromised, or not found in good Biblical hermeneutics.
I'm also finding joy in truths found in fiction. But a piece claiming to be teaching about the character of God should be critiqued against Scripture. Fiction is as important as nonfiction.
Steven,
When it comes to the trinity, how can it be explained? Young's books showed in several places that all were one. Do you remember the discourse about how the distinctness allows God to model love to us? Scripture? Look in the gospels.
As far as submission and heirarchy I suppose you could say Young is somewhat arminian. Is that heresy? Jesus washed feet and said that it was necessary to have a part with him. What if peter would have said no? Of course you can say that he didnt.
I do believe that God submits to our will, it only means free will. And I believe in God's sovereign will. How? God is not constrained by logic. I believe in both, that makes God really cool to me, like a great mystery if you know what I mean.
OK, I have a review for you to read. It is long, so be prepared to sit little while. Read it to the end and tell me what you think"
http://theresurgence.com/files/The%20Shack%20Review.pdf
Post a Comment