God is never described in the Bible using feminine imagery -- Not true. The Psalms in several places use the illustration of the Lord sheltering someone beneath his wings. This is a behavior usually associated with the female bird. See Psalms 17:8-9; 36:7; 57:1; 61:4; 63:7; 91:4. I'll admit that these are ambiguous, and the astute reader will note that I used the male possessive pronoun in relation to the Lord. That's just how I relate to God. But one only needs to go the the New Testament to see a clear and unambiguous reference to Jesus using feminine imagery to describe what he longed to do:
Mt 23:37 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing."God never appears to humans except in the form of the Son and no one can see the face of God and live -- Here Scripture can get pretty ambiguous. With whom did Abraham converse at his encampment near the trees of Mamre? (Genesis 18:1-33) The references go back and forth between three men and the Lord. The word translated as "Lord" is God's proper name, YHWH. In any event, the Lord spoke to Abraham, and Sarah overhead at least a part of the conversation (and found it amusing). In another part of Genesis, Jacob spends the night on the bank of the Jabbok river wrestling with "a man", who is identified in this story as being God. Jacob makes it clear what he saw:
Ge 32:30 So Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, "It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared."God no longer reveals himself except through Scripture -- This is a tough one. Of course God reveals himself though Scripture. This is a key and essential tenet of the reformed faith, and the most important source of my knowledge of who God is and what he requires of me. But I am personally convinced that the Lord works directly with individuals when it suits God to do so. But opening the door to ongoing revelation and epiphany also provides a lot of opportunity for mischief or even downright heresy. One one hand, a person who feels they have had a direct revelation from the Lord might decide that he or she has no need of Scripture or the instruction of spiritual leaders or the fellowship of other Christians. But on the other hand, to claim that God no longer interacts with people except through Scripture and the teachings of the Church denies the reality that many have experienced in their lives. Does God physically manifest himself to people today? I don't know for certain, but would not bother me if there were "road to Damascus" experiences today.
When I wrote my earlier comments about The Shack, I believed that it was a bit heterodox, but not heretical. I still hold that opinion. If I had a criticism of the book, it would be its harshness toward organized religion. I know first-hand how the "organized church" can be a support in trying times, and it is hard for me to imagine a world with no religion.