I’ve been thinking about God lately, and I cannot help but be continually pulled toward an apophatic relationship with God. That is, the more I’m drawn to thinking about God, the more I am convinced of the unknowability of God. And so I wonder if I took on the challenge of Maimonides and spoke about God only in the negative, only stating what God is not.
I’m ready to dive into this, but I’m also struck with the challenge as a parent. I don’t know that it’s fair to my young children to speak to them only of what God is not. Nor do I think a pastor could get away with this for very long. Apophatic sermons, while probably more theologically accurate than kataphatic sermons, can probably tend to get dreary.
I think that Pete Rollins has made the most productive step that an apophatic preacher can make, and that is to truck primarily in the genre of parable.
Me? I think I’m going to spend the next few posts writing about what God is not.
N.B., This post is part of a series exploring apophatic statements about God.