One of the most contentious issues raised by the book, the Shack, is the way we image God. Some say it can't be done and, indeed, shouldn't be done. Others, and I think I would be one of them, would argue that the only way we can talk about God is in human language. Language is symbol and in talking about God, at all, we are already in the realm of image making. Others, take language literally, and when we talk of the first person of the Trinity as Father then we are saying that he is male. The book 'The Shack' doesn't take that line. The Father (Papa), as the story goes, is 'imaged' as an African-American woman. Hence, the controversy - not male, not white!
I would hold with the 'apophatic' tradition that God is mystery and that when we speak of Father, Son & Holy Spirit we are moving in the realm of symbol and analogy. Feminine images, therefore, are perfectly acceptable for God. Male & female, together, image God (Gen 1:27).
Is 'The Shack' right? Am I right?
Chris
P.S. Part 2 of 'The Shack', this Sunday night @ 5.30pm - God and suffering.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment