Ok, guys, so some of you might be wondering why I did the last post; here is the story.
Was reading a magazine called the Adventist World, a publication of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, that I receive because I was raised and am on the books as a member of the SDA church.
Here is a link to the article:
http://adventistworld.org/issue.php?issue=2010-1005&page=12
It sufficiently angered me that I felt compelled to write in; here is my letter. Please feel free to comment with your response to the article and/or my letter. Would love to know how you guys feel!
Letter:
I don't normally write letters, but I feel compelled to correct a couple things that Roy Adams wrote in his recent article, "Spiritual Perils."
First, I find it highly disappointing that Mr. Adams was not able to see past a relatively minor theological difference in order to see the beautiful message in the book "The Shack." Having read it, I completely agree with Eugene Patterson's thoughts that "this book has the potential to do for our generation what John Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress did for his." And contrary to Roy's impression, there is no theological agenda other than painting a picture of God that is more approachable and relatable than the typical dry religions tend to make him out to be.
Secondly, the "clear take-away" is NOT that the dead can communicate with us, but instead that God is indeed actively interested in our lives and in us, as individuals, and deeply cares for us and offers healing and restoration for the painful and broken places in our hearts.
Thirdly, where Roy gets the entire basis of his argument regarding what "The Shack" is about is a very short scene in which Mack, the main character, sees and holds his dead daughter in a scenario orchestrated by God. So, "clearly," the book is about more than a 2-3 page scene. I'm saddened that he couldn't see that. What concerns me more is this concept that an experience like what takes place in the book couldn't take place; that's putting a box on God, and who are we to do that? According to the Bible, Moses died and was buried, yet he appeared at the Transfiguration, did he not? According to the Adventist ideology about the state of the dead, how is that explained? Would Roy be someone who, at the resurrection of Lazarus, would condemn Jesus for doing the impossible? I find it highly disturbing that this seems to be the message that is being sent by his article.
Finally, his comment about God being about "relationships," and then comparing the God of "The Shack" to the God of Jeremiah...heck, compare the God of the Old Testament to the God of the New Testament (discounting Revelation) and you have a stark contrast in the very Word of God, so that argument is null and void. And let's not forget that God IS all about relationships-he's lived in perfect relationship, perfect community for all eternity and wished to share that experience with us, so I really don't understand why Roy doesn't seem to like that idea-what does he think God is all about if not about relationship?
In summary, I'm very disappointed, discouraged, and downright angry that this article was printed as it really does more damage to the Adventist "brand," to borrow Roy's word. I think as Adventists, we should not be so afraid of something that goes against our theology that we can't allow ourselves to see the beauty that is has to offer.
Regards,
Tim Adams
PS: I wonder if Roy would try and correct the theology of a widow at her husband's graveside when she's believing that he's in a better place...? Would that be the "Christian" thing to do? When are we going to stop thinking that we have "the truth" and start acting like human beings, and not like robots that are just reciting the party line and hammering down on anyone and anything that spouts off something different?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Don't forget the story of Saul and the Witch of Endor in 1 Samuel 28 ^_^
Ah, yes, Saul once again trying to make things happen on his own...didn't turn out too well for him.
Good one, Sesame-I had forgotten that one!
Right, I wanted to add it in conjunction to your argument with the Transfiguration.
I became very concerned (and inflamed) after reading Mr. Roy's article. Becoming fearful of differing perspectives in a religious society like Christianity leads to further infighting, prejudice, discrimination, and ultimately, fall-out. I think he has forgotten the advance of Christian society from the Roman period to the Schism. Has he forgotten that early Christianity was, in fact, considered 'occult' and even 'atheist'? People cannot be chained by fear to a 'brand' because it limits God and expands control of church law.
I'm sure he would argue that Moses and Samuel 'walked closely' with God and therefore were allowed to appear for His purposes. Yet Jesus himself said that God has no favorites so we should also not show favoritism for one person or group over another (James 1:27 and Ch. 2).
The point I'd like to make before it gets away from me in a slew of tangents is this: regardless of the varied beliefs on what happens after death the main point remains that there is a hope. There is a hope that God will redeem and reward those who have led good lives taking care of one another. There is a hope that we can be with God and with those we love. I personally don't think the mechanics matter. The main issue is that we are mortal and need to fulfill our purpose of alleviating as much suffering on Earth as possible.
Post a Comment