The above question is one that I've had to think through recently. Someone told me in person that there should be "no other name" for God used in literature, as this constitutes idolatry. 

Here are my thoughts on representations of God in literature.

1. If you personally are not being asked to worship the literary representation of God, it is not wrong. If the author is not setting up a god in the process of writing, but rather depicting a different world run by different rules, I believe there is no reason to be alarmed. Another world run by different rules? Clearly this book is not a religious handbook and does not have such specific relevance in the lives of its readers.

2. Literary representations of God usually do not (and simply cannot) capture His entire character - therefore, don't expect them to. When Jesus told the parable of unjust judge, He was representing a god-like character to His listeners. However - as is often the case in story - all facets of God cannot be accurately captured. The Bible says that fullness of God is best seen in Jesus Christ (not in a story). The parable of the unjust judge showed two facets of God - His authority to judge and His absolute power to do so. His grace is shown in a parable like the prodigal son. These are simply two examples of how stories typically only capture particular facets of God's character.

3. Look at Jesus. Jesus told parable after parable about the kingdom of heaven and frequently in these parables, god-like characters had other names - "the father of the prodigal son", "the sower", "the unjust judge", and so on. Jesus was not saying that these characters were God. Neither was He asking his listeners to worship storied figures. He was representing different parts of God's character.

4. Does it honour God? This is the number one question for readers and writers alike to ask once they have established that it is not wrong to represent God in literature - for it is only right if it brings glory to His name. If it's defamatory, by all means, don't read it.

If a story can't capture the entire essence of God, why write allegories at all? What is the point in trying to depict something of your Christian beliefs in story? Is it really useful? Some would argue in the case of fantasy that it is not. But I believe the very strength of representing something of the God we know and worship in literature is the weakness I mentioned above. An author can't capture all there is to God. Therefore, an author must simplify, honing in on one or two concepts and thus rendering these easier to understand. 

And so, little by little, piece by piece, stories from a Christian perspective help us to know the Creator of the universe better.

Recently, I have once again faced some opposition for the type of literature I write. Each time I encounter this sort of thing - a reality of being a published author - it forces to me think through, once again, what I believe about the type of literature I write. I believe this is a good process, because growth is always important for a writer.

The letter of protest that was written to me raised issues with my books on a number of accounts, each of which I have thought carefully in turn before returning to - you guessed it - writing more fantasy for my next publishing contract. 

One issue I wanted to discuss today is the question of whether dark literature is appropriate for young adults. I have been asked before my reasons for writing such "gritty" literature. While my fantasy books are not scandalous or even (I believe) unnecessarily gory, adult readers occasionally debate whether it is wise to expose young readers to such dark material. By dark, I suppose they are referring to the fact that I show death numerous times, general child maltreatment (although even innocent Harry Potter has that - what relative puts bars on their nephew's window and barely feeds them?), supernatural powers of evil, general violence, and at times, plain old twisted human nature at its best - or rather worst. Are these things appropriate in literature for young adults?

I say young adults because I wish to stress that I don't write for "children" as such. Currently, I'm not writing middle grade literature for five through to twelve-year-olds. These books are for twelves and up. 

Next, I want to say no to my original question. No, and yes. I suppose a more accurate answer is "it depends". I tend to ask myself the "is-it-appropriate-question" with regards to the following criteria.

1. Is the perspective helpful? If I'm showing out of hand violence as a good thing - if I'm giving the reader no hope - if all I'm doing is creating confusion and not reason - I consider myself violating my own God-given image, made to reflect my Creator, who created reason out of chaos, meaning out of confusion. When I write darker content, I do it to bring meaning and reason out of the confusion of this life. I want to show young adults that life can be hard and still have purpose. You can lose it all and still have everything to gain. You can suffer tremendous pain, survive it, and thrive in God's timing and purpose.

2. Is it necessary to tell the story? And is this part of the story necessary to tell? Do I really need to show that particular death? Or can I mention it off screen or even just let the person live? If it serves no purpose in the plot and the ultimate good that I'm trying to work through the story, I discard that particular story beat. If it heavily influences the character and provides a good learning point through narrative, then it is worthwhile including it.

3. Is it age appropriate? With regards to this question, I tend to assume in young adult literature that young adults can handle most of what adults can with regards to the content of books. However, what they do need is guidance. Hence, worldview infused with hope and a modicum of wisdom is certainly important.

What are the benefits of "darker literature" for adolescents (when appropriate)? I think those who are exposed to tough questions early on will have a better idea of what they believe and how to cope with the obstacles life throws at them. Adults tend to look at young adults and believe their innocence needs to be preserved. What they don't realise is that, for many young adults, their innocence has been robbed from them by society, bullying, or some other source that the parent, guardian, or well-meaning adult has no idea about. Though tragic, this is increasingly the case. Even if the said young adult has been completely sheltered externally, they cannot be entirely protected from the ravages of early depression, anxiety, or some form of internal struggle. And if you wanted to shield them from everything, you'd have to ensure they live and move in a Wifi free zone. Because sin exists, many young adults have encountered the broken world around them not long after they hit adolescence. Now they need help dealing with it. Ignoring it and pretending the moment of the breaking of the bubble never happened will not solve anything.

Would you deny them the opportunity to confront and work through the tough issues?

What are your thoughts?