Politics around the Shack’s kitchen table

When Papa, Jesus and Sarayu hang out together around the kitchen table after a hard day’s work, do they ever talk politics?  Is politics “too dirty” and “too human” for them to care about?  Do they not care about the complexities of how human communities work together to get things done?  Do they have a specific opinion about exactly how this ought to work?  Are they annoyed that the human race hasn’t yet paid close enough attention to the Bible to figure out the one perfect set of local, state, national, and global policies?  Are they rooting for any particular candidates or parties or causes?  They do seem to seem to have strong opinions regarding some specific policy matters in the Old Testament.  To what degree are those ideas relevant to us today?

If Papa, Jesus and Sarayu ever DO talk politics, do they agree on every little detail of public policy?  Can they be all-knowing with a perfect understanding of the world and how it works, but still have more than one good idea about how the current situation might be changed for the better?

And if they ever DO disagree, how do they converse about it?  How do they treat each other in that discussion?  Does this tell us anything about the Church’s role in the ongoing human political conversation?

Comments

  1. Frank says:

    When you think in perfect unity and perfect wisdom, it is hard to imagine the need for a coffee table debate. The imagery in The Shack certainly allows for some literary license in how it portrays the Trinity, if only to make things easier on the human minds of Mack and the reader. Only Jesus is given to us in the Scripture as “become flesh.” So independent “opinions,” to me, are theologically unlikely.

    However, in working with us humans, God makes room for our opinions, our points of view. We see that in interaction between the “angel” and Lot over the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. We see it in Moses’ plea for God to forsake his desire to destroy sinful Israel and start over. Prayer is our interaction with Papa about the things that are important to us.

    But it is obvious that God supports no one political position or candidate over another. Our knowledge is limited, our wisdom flawed. But it is the reasoning that can form and change positions as we grow in knowledge that very much from God and separates us from the animals.

    Sure we are boneheads in our disagreements and differing positions from each other on subjects that are important for the moment and miniscule over the long term. Does this mean we shouldn’t have them? Should we just back away? Or should we participate with the one caveat being that we not forsake the love we are to show even those with whom we disagree?

  2. shackbible says:

    Hey Frank, great to “see” you! I like your idea of participating without forsaking love; I think that nails it. I’ve been experimenting lately with actually DOING that, and I’m starting to think it is actually possible. For me, it’s had a lot to do with managing my instinctive fear/anger responses to people who challenge my way of seeing things.

    RE: God supporting political positions… I don’t think it’s obvious that God doesn’t do this. For example, did God have an opinion about slavery–the hot-button political issue of the 1850s and 60’s? It’s an extreme example, but it convinces me that an incarnate God cannot be exactly apolitical.

  3. Shirley says:

    Is this somebody’s actual kitchen?? Yours?

  4. shackbible says:

    I don’t know if it’s a real kitchen. It’s just a random pic I found on the Internet.

Leave a Reply