Episode 57: Janet Williams – What We Can (and Can’t) Say About God

Jared: [00:00:00] You are listening to Faith for Normal People, the only other God ordained podcast on the internet. 

Pete: I’m Pete Enns.

Jared: And I’m Jared Byas.

Hey folks, it’s time to tell you about our May class called Mythbusting the Bible with Dan McClellan and Pete Enns. That’s right. We’re bringing in the heavyweights and they’re going to invite you into a different kind of conversation about the Bible. One that’s honest, curious, and unafraid to wrestle with tough questions.

Pete: Yeah, we’re gonna share our own personal aha moments, things from the Bible that shifted our entire perspective. And if you’re ready to discover a more thoughtful approach to the Bible, join Dan and me as we share about the experiences that open our eyes to a deeper, more nuanced way of reading scripture.

Jared: And the live class and Q-&-A are happening Wednesday, May 28th, 2025 from 8:00 to 9:30 PM Eastern Time, followed by a Society of Normal People-exclusive Q-&-A. Don’t worry if you can’t make it. The link to the class recording with [00:02:00] downloadable class slides will be made available. It’s pay what you can until the class ends.

Then it’ll cost $25 for the recording. 

Pete: Sign up for the class at www.thebiblefornormalpeople.com/mythbustingthebible, hope to see you there. 

Pete: Hey folks. We’ve been working on our children’s Bible for over a year and it’s a project we are extremely proud of. And guess what? It’s finally here. God’s Stories as Told by God’s Children is out now and ready for you and your curious kids to read together. 

Jared: Yes, it’s informed by biblical scholarship, of course, with The Bible for Normal People.

It’s inclusive, deeply respectful of children’s imagination and intelligence. God’s Stories as Told by God’s Children is the storybook Bible you’ll wish you had when you were a kid. 

Pete: And it contains stories from over 50 contributors, including biblical scholars, theologians, and practitioners representing diverse religious traditions, locations and lived experiences mirroring the many voices we find in the Bible. 

Jared: God’s Stories as Told by God’s Children allows parents to introduce children to their own beliefs and traditions in conversation with the stories found inside the Bible. You can order your copyright now at thebiblefornormalpeople.com/godsstories. 

Pete: Hey everybody. Welcome to Faith for Normal People, and I’m joined by my wonderful co-host, Anna Seiges-Beal, and we’re talking about something called apophatic theology.

People Don’t Freak Out. It’s a great term: apophatic theology. And what does it mean? Well, basically it boils down to this. Our words are, at the end of the day, inadequate for grasping God and for talking about God. But we have to use words anyway. So how does that work? 

Anna: So today’s guest, Janet Williams, specializes in religious studies, theology, classics, and philosophy, and has taught about those things at universities and colleges in Japan.

And the U.K. Her most recent book is Seeking The God Beyond: A Beginner’s Guide to Christian apophatic Spirituality, [00:03:00] which sounds like a great read. Yeah, and that’s actually, yeah, that’s what we’re gonna talk about today. 

Pete: Yeah. Fantastic book. So anyway, and don’t forget to stay tuned at the end of the episode for quiet Time where Anna and I will reflect a bit more and more deeply on what we learned during the episode. 

Anna: We hope you enjoy this conversation with Janet Williams. 

Janet: [teaser clip plays]

Anna: Well, Janet, we are so happy to have you here with us today to talk about apophatic [00:04:00] theology. And, and since that is maybe not a term that very many of our listeners have heard before, I wonder if you could just tell us what is apophatic theology and spirituality and how does it work? And yeah, just give us a breakdown of it.

Janet: Uh, it’s a Greek word and it’s really annoying when people use Greek words instead of English ones, isn’t it? But, uh, the reason for using it is ’cause there isn’t a really good English one. So, uh, if I have to translate it, it’ll be unsaying. Um, but just explain a little bit if I can. So what we’re talking about happens when we say we know something about God, or when we say we’ve got something to say about God.

Um, and there are two problems that come up immediately. One problem about us and one problem about, uh, talking about God. Um, so if I can just come at that at both ends, uh, very quickly if I can, talking about God. If you imagine trying to tell somebody, um, what it’s like to do something that they’ve never done before, like, you know, [00:05:00] somebody, somebody who’s never given birth says to you, what’s it like to give birth?

Or somebody who’s never, you know, woken up at dawn on a mountaintop says, what’s that like? You know, you might try to put it into words, but there’s, and, and you’re gonna say, well, it’s a bit like this. And well, actually no, it’s a bit like that. And, and then you’re probably gonna at some stage kind of dry up and say, but it’s not really like any of those, you know, it doesn’t go into words. And if that’s true about falling in love and giving birth and up mountaintops, it’s double-true about God.

God is too big for our words because what our words do is they point to experiences and bits of reality. You know, they point to a table, not a chair, those kinds of things. But God isn’t a bit of reality, right? God’s the source of reality. God’s behind and before and beyond all things. So words won’t work for God in the way that they work for other [00:06:00] things.

And they don’t even work perfectly for other things either when they really, right. So number one, God’s too big for words and therefore, if we’re gonna say something about God, we need to at some stage kind of put the words down, say “and that’s not really it.” Uh, you know, if God’s beyond. So that’s the first thing. And then if you come at it, the other end, uh, there’s a problem about us trying to talk about God as well.

Right? You know, um, because the minute you talk about something, the minute you claim to know something, uh, you are making some kind of relation, uh, claim about your relationship to it. You know this, we use words like mastery, don’t we? You know, we, we have mastery learning and mastery knowledge. Um, knowledge is power, people say.

As soon as you say you’ve got something to say about somebody, you are saying that you, you stand back and you see it, and you have a certain kind of relationship to it.[00:07:00] 

But that gets our encounter with God completely wrong, because it’s not like that with God. It’s God who knows us, not the other way around. To stand in front of God as you imagine. Remember, let’s think about Isaiah and Jeremiah and Ezekiel and you, the old biblical prophets. You know, when they find themselves encountering God, they don’t go, “aha, I see what this is.”

They, they go, they go, they go, “oh, I- go away. I’m too small for you, don’t they? You know, just, ah, I can’t cope with, with, with, with this.” Um, sometimes when we talk about God, particularly glib theologians like me, you know, people are writing books about God. It’s, it’s almost as if we’re using words to get a slightly more domesticated and comfortable version of God that we can kind of deal with, you know, instead of the wild and untamable, and, you know, frankly, slightly terrifying reality [00:08:00] of the majesty and the mystery of God. So two problems about saying we know about God and that’s why we unsay, which is what apophasis means. Did it? There you go. Next question. 

Pete: I would love to spend a long time unpacking both of those ’cause they’re, they’re fascinating and, um, can, can I give you an example?

Alright. Just, just, and help us understand this from, let’s say an apophatic point of view. God is love. Help us understand.

Janet: You chose the best. You chose the best one, Pete. Well, um, okay, so, uh, strike one. Uh, love’s a good word for God, uh, isn’t it? Um, but if we wrote down everything that we mean by love, the totality of it [00:09:00] would not capture our intuition of what love is, of what God is. So we’re kind of, when you say God is love, what you are kind of doing is, is is throwing an arrow in the air and saying, you know, look in that direction.

But we’re gonna have to go beyond. Um, and particularly for people who’ve had quite damaging experiences of what human beings call “love.” It’s quite important, isn’t it, to be able to say, uh, yeah, but that’s not what we mean. Um, and uh, and, and, and there’s a whole bunch of stuff, expectations that we wrap around “God is love” that get challenged, uh, all the time by the Bible, don’t they? 

Pete: And those expectations, do those expectations come from our limitations? Are, are, are our biases? Or what, what do we say about that? 

Janet: Yeah. I think, I think so. I mean, um, [00:10:00] most of us, when we’re thinking about love, we, um, our understanding of love is how humans love, right?

I mean, we don’t tend to talk about cars loving us or, or trees loving us. Some of us, some of us talk about the earth loving us, but even then we’re, you know, we’re kind of struggling a little bit. Um, God isn’t a human being. Uh, therefore, the way human beings love is not the way God loves. Therefore, sometimes the word love is, um, it just starts, you know, it generally points us in the right direction.

But sometimes, it can just point in a slightly wrong direction because our knowledge of love is distorted. Um, uh, hopefully later on you’re gonna ask me to talk about some of the great apophatic theologians, and one of the people I’m gonna name is Maximus the Confessor. And Maximus says, well, you can do two things when you are using language like love.

You know, one is if humans love, then God doesn’t, uh, because what we mean by love is [00:11:00] not what God, uh, is. Um, or alternatively you do it the other way around and you say, well, God is love and what we have kind of isn’t, isn’t perfectly, isn’t really even a very good shadow of, you know what I mean? Um, and a lot of us are doing that kind of move already with, with things like “God is father.”

That’s a much more familiar move, uh, isn’t it? 

Pete: Anna, I have 80 questions. Do you want to ask one? Is anything coming to mind at this point? They’re good questions. They’re curious questions. But go ahead Anna, why don’t you? 

Anna: Well, and um, I like the example of God is love, but it might be that one, even that one is a little bit too complicated.

So I love how you brought up—too complicated for me. Um, but I love how you brought up “God is father” and then apophatic theology or spirituality would say, no, God’s not father. Is that right? That’s how you do it. 

Janet: Uh, yes. Yes. But. It’s important to say [00:12:00] God is father. And it, and by, you know, also important to say God is love. Right. Um, so the thing about unsaying is that you have to say first, you know, so apophatic theologians aren’t sort of wandering around going, ah, you shall not speak, you shall not speak of God. You know, we sing our hymns, we say our prayers, and we read our Bibles and we notice that Jesus calls God “father” in a very particular kind of way, doesn’t he?

Um, so God is Father has, um, if you like, it’s got a lot of nutritional content for us. Um, and, and we need to eat that up. Um, you know, we need to digest it and we need to get all the goodies out of it that we possibly can. And then you do what you do when you’ve eaten something with what’s left over. Being polite because I’m on your podcast.

Anna: You’re, you’re doing great. Yeah. After you eat something, there’s something left over. [00:13:00] 

Janet: And then what do you do with it? Yes, absolutely. Um, and, and so having said that, God is Father, father, it’s then really important to say, but not in the way that we know father in a way that actually quite often challenges and cuts across what we know, father.

So let’s take that word, father back because actually it’s starting to be unhelpful and—Well actually, sorry Anna, I’m just gonna keep talking. It’s unhelpful in two ways, isn’t it? Father and, and love and all the things as well. Um, one is there are people for whom father is an unhelpful word.

And so thrusting God is father down their throats is, is not gonna be a great thing to do. But there are also people for whom God is Father is such a lovely word that they have this little God the father image. Um, and the [00:14:00] things we human beings do with images is, is we really, really quickly turn them into idols and we worship them.

And, um, I’m sure you’ve had experiences just as, as I’ve heard, um, somebody who’s so fixed on God is father, but if somebody challenges that they get defensive, hostile, angry. Uh, you know, um, so the, the, the thing about words is both their limitations and their attractiveness. Both of these are dangerous.

And so the apophatic theologian comes in wearing their boots and says, “kick it out.”

Anna: That I, that sounds like it, it sounds to me like a process, right? So you get very, very comfortable with one kind of image maybe, and then your apophatic theologian comes along, like, you gotta get rid of it. You’re making it into an idol. 

Janet: Yeah.

And in that sense, in that sense, it’s just, it’s just growing up in God, right? Because I, [00:15:00] I can’t imagine there’s anybody who could go back to their very earliest understanding of God and say, “I still have the same understanding.” 

You know, uh, you know, for most of us, we really did think that God was an old man in the sky.

I have tested this theory on many children. “What do you think about God?” They all go, “Old man in the sky on the clouds. Yes. Absolutely. Beyond the moon.” And, um, and we really think that, and we don’t anymore. You know, we grow out of things. Many people when they become, when they come to faith, you know, bless their, their beautiful hearts. Think that being a Christian means nothing bad will ever happen to them. 

And then the first Christian who gets cancer, they’re faith wobbles, you know? And they suddenly have to go, oh, my image of God as committed to make sure you know this, these kinds of things to happen, that has to go.

Um, so in a sense, all the apophatic theologian is doing is being systematic about something that is [00:16:00] quite natural, uh, anyway, and drawing our attention to our infirmities.

Pete: Yeah. So it’s not a good idea to, uh, cite a verse of the Bible and say, this is clear and there’s, there’s no counter voice necessary, right? I mean, and I say that somewhat, you know, a little facetiously because, maybe in the States more than in the U.K., but we hear that a lot from, from well-intending people who say, listen, the Bible is God’s word.

Therefore it is clear. There’s nothing that we’re, we’re not limited. We’re, we’re seeing things as they are. Oh, we might be a little bit fuzzy here and there, but this is it for us. And I, what I hear you saying, if I, if I’m correct, is that the nature of scripture itself counters that notion. [00:17:00] 

Janet: Yes, absolutely.

Um, so to be really clear, um, it’s very easy to fall into the trap, isn’t it, of saying, on the one hand, there are people who are faithful to a scriptural witness, and then on the other hand, there are these terrible people who, you know, who play with it. And that, that is, that is a trap. 

Pete: Um. So we’ve, we wanna get to the people that you want to talk about.

We want to hear about the, the great voices of the past, maybe some contemporary voices that also have an apophatic, um, theological way of thinking. Um, but I, I’d like to just come back for a second to, to scripture and really the nature of scripture, um, with, for example, calling God “Father” as Jesus does, many would say this is just part and parcel of the cultural limitations, the very natural human limitations of anybody speaking about anything.

So I guess the big [00:18:00] question is, are the authors of scripture, you know, the human authors of scripture, are they, are, are, are they subject to the same, I guess critique if that’s not too harsh a word of putting a, a theology. So what do you think of that? 

Janet: Uh, so I think. Yes, they are subject to the same kind of critique because they critique one another.

So this is not something that we are taking from outside and using it as a way to read scriptures. It’s in scripture itself, and, and teaching us that this is how we talk about God. Um, so it, it, it begins with Genesis. Uh, this is how the world was created. Oh, and also, this is how the world was created, which is completely different.

Um, because what we, what we need is this, um, one set of words isn’t enough. So we need the truth [00:19:00] that’s, you know, we need the truths that are in Genesis. About the power of God, the awesome control of God. And then we need the truths that are in Genesis two about the intimacy of God and the personal care of God.

And God breathing life into us. You know, one distant, one close, one transcendent, one imminent, one, one intimate, one all-powerful. Both of those. And then, you know, skip forward a little bit and we get, uh, two different accounts of the history of Israel. Uh, why it was necessary for kings, uh, to emerge. Uh, one narrative which says, uh, this is really, um, a decline from a perfect situation and another narrative that says it’s called God’s will.

And then you get into lots of detail, right? Um, you know, presentation of Solomon, for example. Is he wise? Why does he have all those, all those [00:20:00] wives? Is he faithful to God? Why are all the wives foreign? You know, all of those, you know, quick scripture is constantly getting asked to, to ask questions. The Book of Ruth, um, contradicts, uh, Ezra and Nehemiah in terms of what is the value of marrying outside, uh, the Jewish nation.

It’s before we start talking about what Jonah does to it, et cetera. And then when we get to the New Testament, and we’ve got, we’ve got four different gospels, which are compatible in many ways, but contradictory in some ways. Does this fabulous dance of saying something and unsaying it or saying something and then putting something, uh, that sits at an angle to it, uh, alongside it precisely, uh, to get us to, to, to be unsettled and to think about what’s, what’s really going on.

Jesus, of course, is the great king of unsettling spirituality, isn’t he? And the, the biblical authors have this kind of awesome, awesome [00:21:00] confidence in the reader that they put these things, uh, in and they stick history next to legend, next to poetry, next to satire, next to story next to Apocalypse, and expect us to know how to read it.

Uh, you know, and each of those saying, and unsaying, and shifting the ground under us and say, come on. You know, look beyond these words. Look beyond these words. And, and you know, it, there are arrows pointing towards God, but we need to go beyond them. Scripture teaches us how to read it. 

Anna: I love that. It reminds me a little bit of, um, like an improv class where you say “yes, and,” you know, so, so just, it makes me think that, that what apophatic theology does is it says yes, and.

And I think that you said it better. Yes, but. And I love that you point to the fact that even our biblical authors are doing this. However, [00:22:00] if I may say, it sounds dangerous though. Like there are, even, even at the very beginning when we were talking about God is love and then we were trying to unsay it, that there was something within my little evangelical child spirit that was like, oh no.

Oh no. I don’t know. We can’t, we can’t unsay that, you know, there, it just seems like surely there’s something that we can’t unsay or can’t challenge or, or yeah. So I’m curious about these early apophatic theologians or maybe even some more modern, have, have other people kind of had that same experience where they’re like, “Ooh, I don’t want you to unsay that thing” and have these folks gotten in trouble?

Janet: Oh, oh yes. Oh yes. I, I, everybody has a nervousness about this and it’s a kinda righteous nervousness, isn’t it? You know, we, we, this is God we’re talking about, right? It, you know, it, we, we can’t be casual about it. [00:23:00] Uh, enormously. It matters partly because God comes to us as the word, but we can get onto that later.

Yes, people have got into trouble. People, people have been, uh, accused of heresy. Um, Marguerite Porete was burned at the stake. John of the Cross was imprisoned and tortured, uh, you know, uh, and, and various other people. 

Anna: Doesn’t that make you nervous? Aren’t you worried for your life, Janet?

Janet: Listen, apophatic spirituality is dangerous. And, uh, and maybe you’d be good enough to remind me after I’ve gone on for one, uh, to come back and talk about those dangers. But the first thing I wanna say is, what on Earth gives you the impression that God isn’t dangerous? You know, you, you, Anna, you talked about your evangelical upbringing.

I am led [00:24:00] to believe that every American evangelical reads, C.S. Lewis.

Anna: Absolutely a hundred percent.

Janet: And think about Aslan is not a tame lion. You know, uh, it’s, it’s right there that, that sense of, um, there’s a security in God, but it’s terrifying as, as well, you know, as I said earlier, you know, the prophets when they encounter God, oh, you know, I, I can’t, I can’t deal with it.

You’ve got all of that stuff in the, in the Old Testament about, you know, put your hand on the arc of the covenant and you’ll die. Um, you’ve got all of that stuff, but no one shall see the face of God and live. You’ve got people meeting Jesus, the revelation of God, and saying, go away. Uh, um, so, there are, there are some constructions of our faith [00:25:00] that are all together, too comfortable. 

And, uh, and I, I, I wanna go back to that image of the kind of burnished idol. Our lovely, our lovely comfortable image of God. Uh, apophasis is dangerous. And it’s not only dangerous because other people will mistake what we are doing for an insult to God and a religion, it’s dangerous because of the effect it has on us.

Um, because it’s not just God we like to have a comfortable image of, is it? It’s ourselves that we like to have a comfortable image of. Um, and you know, I began by saying there are two problems with making claims to know God. One is a problem, that God’s too big. And the other problem is what we do with words when we get our little hands on [00:26:00] them.

Um, and, uh, and, and we build up a sense of the person who knows God and the person who is called into relationship with God. And one of the things that the apophatic theologian suffers is having their sense of who they are stripped away, um, as well. And it can be painful, uh, at which point you might prompt me to talk about John at the Cross, but we might leave that for later if you are happy to do so.

Pete: Consider yourself prompted. I would love to hear about John at the Cross.

Janet: Quote. So, um, John at the Cross, extraordinary for, oh, let me see if I can think of just a couple of reasons. Um. He, he suffers imprisonment and torture, not simply for his apophatic [00:27:00] theology, but for the way he puts it into practice.

Because he’s about reforming the spiritual life as well, you know, so he’s not just talking about God, he’s building, um, life, uh, with God and, um, challenging, uh, people. So he suffers enormously for his faith. And yet, uh, what he does is to find that when everything is taken from him, you know, freedom and, uh, food and physical safety, um, and, um, reputation and company and capacity to participate in the liturgy.

When all of it is taken from him, everything is stripped away. What does he find? He finds God. Absolutely present to him in the darkness. Um, and he basically rewrites the Song of Songs in 15th century, um, Spanish poetry that is [00:28:00] just extraordinary. He finds the love of God when everything else has gone. He finds this extraordinary intimacy with God, um, and is able then, uh, afterwards to show that to other people.

But he’s the great master of, um, what we call the dark night of the soul, um, which is, you know, this visitor when, when your comfortable image of God is taken from you by force, by circumstance, when you simply can no longer believe the comfortable stuff that you believed. It’s hugely painful. And John has, um, a whole kind of psychological understanding, psycho-spiritual understanding of that, um, that he, he lays out for us. So we get to understand that, that these are kind of liminal spaces where God calls us into deeper relationship with him and it’s blooming [00:29:00] painful. Oh, and are gonna go back to CS Lewis again, just for Anna.

You know, um, uh, you know, the story, uh, of Eustace, uh, in, in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, he turns into a dragon. He turns into a dragon, which is of course, just a manifestation of his own nature. He’s always been a dragon. He just didn’t know it, and he didn’t look like it, you know? So now he has the skin to match his heart.

He realizes who he is. And then you get, I think, one of the most extraordinary pieces of writing where Lewis talks about what happens when Eustace realizes who he is and hates it so much that he’s prepared to tear his skin off. Um, and do you remember, uh, it’s terrifying, uh, this piece of children’s literature, isn’t it?

Because he talks about tearing off his dragon skin, and it’s a bit like tearing off a scab, you know? It’s painful and delicious at the same time until he sees this dragon skin lying in front of him, and he looks down [00:30:00] and he sees there’s another one. Oh my gosh, that one’s gonna come off. And then, and, and, and it keeps going.

And at some point, this is just completely exhausting, dispiriting and painful. I’m never gonna get free. There’s always gonna be another dragon skin.

How many of us know that to be true? You know, uh, there’s just dragon skin under dragon skin under dragon skin in us. And in the end, Aslan comes along and he says, you’re gonna have to let me. And he lays down and the lion’s claws go into him, takes the skin, you know, and, uh, you know, God does that sometimes. Um, it’s really painful. I can’t remember what the question was.

Anna: It’s, I, I think it was just, it might have been just the question of danger, but I love what you, what you’re saying that, um, doing, doing the, the work of apophatic spirituality means not only do you get to know God more by kind of putting down your own idols, [00:31:00] but, but also you get to know yourself more and who you really are.

So you can, I don’t know. So you can actually become who you are. 

Janet: Yeah, I think so. And it hurts. Yeah. 

Anna: And it’s painful. 

Pete: Well, so. To get back to the adult literature, John of the Cross. Uh, uh, although I, I love that, that part, I mean, I love the Chronicles of Narnia. Just, uh, I read them for the first time after college, never read them.

I said, oh, that’s what people are talking about. But, um, with John of the Cross, he rewrites the Song of Songs you say. And he has, he’s trying to, I’m, I’m, I’m gonna make sure I understand. He’s trying to express, in his own words, probably inadequately, the level of intimacy that he has with God as a result of this contemplative journey of the dark of the soul.[00:32:00] 

Am I right about that?

Janet: Absolutely.

Pete: So even there, I mean, people might say, well, it’s ironic, you know, he is into apophatic theology. He to write it all, write it all down. But he, he knows he is this an arrow pointing somewhere and, and this is what you pursue. 

Janet: Okay. So, um, can we talk first about darkness? And then we’ll talk about the irony of writing it all down and using words to unsay words. Can we? 

Pete: Yes. 

Janet: So, um, the thing about darkness, um, one of the great biblical accounts of, uh, meeting God that’s been taken up by all the great apophatic writers is the image of Moses climbing Sinai, uh, Exodus 20 and 21. Um, and you’ll recall that at the top of Sinai where Moses meets God to pick up the Ten Commandments, uh, you know, it’s like an Amazon delivery, isn’t it?

Here they are [00:33:00] already written off. Go. God is on the mountain in thick cloud. Um, and the account actually says, you know, that the, the cloud deepens as as he goes up. So it’s cloud on the way up and it’s thick darkness, uh, at the top. So what we’ve got is a different way of talking about knowing. The difference between the kind of knowing where, you know, all the lights are on and you are standing back, observing something possibly with your measuring tape in your hand, or, or you know, in your notebook.

Uh, and, and you can say, aha, I can see this. I can see where it begins. I can see where it ends. I can see, you know, how to get to it and see the sort of shape of it, uh, et cetera. That kind of factual knowledge and the knowing that is quite different from that, which is. Uh, it, it’s the intimacy word again, isn’t it?

And, um, you know, the, the irony, [00:34:00] uh, no, it’s not irony, is it? The, the, the puzzle, the paradox that, um, when you really know someone, you know how little you know them, you know? Um, so if you and I were to spend a weekend together and I came away, somebody might say to me, do you know Pete and Nana? And they’d say, yeah, I know Pete and Anna, you know, um, but I don’t know if either of you two are married.

Um, but if you are, if somebody asked your partner, do you know Pete? Do you know Anna? They may well say something like, and I know them really well. Um, and yet they constantly surprise me. And after however many years we’ve been together, there’s, there’s still a mystery to them and, and a sense of so much more to discover.

That’s what a really good relationship [00:35:00] is like, isn’t it? And, and that’s why, um, when we meet people intimately, uh, quite often we don’t want to stand afar with our measuring tape in our notepad. We wanna come and lay hands on them. We wanna breathe the same air as them. And, uh, and there’s all of the kind of, you know, the marital nuptial imagery that you get in the Song of Songs, but throughout the Bible and picked up very cheekily by Jesus on a regular basis.

Uh, as, uh, as well, it’s a different kind of knowing. And in a sense, when we unsay our words, we are pointing towards that. You know, um, you wouldn’t just sit down with the, the, the person for whom your heart beats most strongly and talk and talk and talk, and talk and talk. [00:36:00] Yes, you’ll do that. But there’ll be times when the words stop and those will be the most precious times.

Pete: This has fascinated me for a long time. I haven’t fully understood it. I’ve tried reading Maximus the Confessor. He’s not the easiest person to read if you ask me. What should I, am I dumb? Should I, should I know him? Or, or- 

Janet: No? But I hope you, I hope you find, I hope you find your way into Maximus. He’s one of my great loves. I love so many dead men. He’s one of them.

Pete: I’m not sure how to take that. But anyway, um, no, it’s, what, what strikes me is, um, how, I mean, this is a rather obvious point to make at this, at this point in our, in our discussion, but the, the, the marriage, if you will, between apophatic [00:37:00] spirituality and contemplative spirituality, which, um, really words can get in the way pretty quickly of that.

And I’m thinking of Brian Laird, you know, Into the Silent Land, which is just a beautiful book, which I think summarizes these things, in my opinion very well. And, uh, yeah, it’s, to me, it’s, it’s here. This is my, my rant is why didn’t anybody teach me this stuff in church? Um, in, I went to seminary for four years, a Protestant Calvinist seminary, and I, I never even heard the word before, let alone what it meant and what it can add to the life of thought and to the spiritual life. 

But it’s, it’s not there. And, um, it’s disappointing, you know, but it’s still okay. You know, you’re never too old to learn and to change your patterns and to move in different directions. So, and uh, and for me, that’s been about the past 20 years of trying to think differently about, [00:38:00] uh, um, how I conceive of God and even talk about God and I, I’m only talking about myself.

‘Cause I know there are people listening here who probably have, are in a similar position. There’s, they’re tired, they’re tired of the words, they’re tired of the inadequacies of the, what do you call, the domesticating of God with our language. And, um, it’s just beautiful to hear. 

Janet: Can I pick up on just two things there?

Um, I wanna talk about putting words down and going to silence. But then also putting words down and going in the other direction towards more words. Um, so as you say, the contemplative tradition is, is the kind of next cousin to the apophatic tradition there.

I guess if only we can just stop with our, [00:39:00] our, um, neurotic claims that God is thus and so, and not thus and so, um, and actually start to look and start to listen and to stop making claims and wait for the burning bush that’s under our noses, uh, you know, to be noticed. All of those kinds of things. So there’s a lot about silence in the apophatic tradition.

Of course, there’s stop talking and, um, pay attention. Uh, stop fixing on the words and look at what’s under and beyond the words. Um, so when apophatic texts end, it’s, uh, it’s not because they’ve said everything that needs to be said, it’s because they’ve brought you to the place where you don’t need words anymore.

Um, so silence is really important and all the things that you can do in silence. Um, [00:40:00] but in the other direction, so, what the apophatic tradition is really mounting a campaign of protest against is that there are certain words that work for God and you have to use those ones and certain and all the rest don’t work. And some of them are absolutely terrible.

And if you use those, you’re, you know. Um, so, uh, one way to do this is, is to just explode into words and to say, “Hey, we need all the words that are possible.” You know, uh, um, everything has that kind of nutritional value that we were talking about earlier. You can, you can, uh, mine virtually anything for some, some wisdom about, about God.

And so the apophatic tradition also leaps straight to poetry and to song and to, well, the kind of stuff that Jesus did. You know, storytelling that’s rich with paradox and [00:41:00] surprise, you know, so words used. Because you can’t just take words away, because we know silencing is a form of oppression, isn’t it?

Silence has to be chosen, it has to be timely, and it has to be rich. And one way to keep it that way is to balance it really, really well. Um, so we go and we sing our love songs to God, and we go and read the poetry, and we look at the Christian artists and novelists, not just the people who wrote theological textbooks and biblical commentaries, uh, et cetera, and see the richness because once you start to play with words, uh, then all sorts of richness comes out. And again, that’s just following the way of Jesus really. He was a great wordsmith, wasn’t he?

Anna: So what I hear you saying is, um, there, there’s times for silence and then there’s times to, to engage with words. But, [00:42:00] um, but maybe in, uh, a more artistic way and, and what, what it draws to mind is like the Old Testament prophets.

It’s like you can’t do prophecy without doing poetry. It, which drives me a little bit crazy as a prophets person. Um, but I wonder if that could help us circle back to St. John of the Cross and how he tried to write down this, this, uh, experience of God and, and how that could be a good thing.  

Janet: The kind of words, um, that John uses are both, um, very beautiful poetic words, uh, but also, um, a contextual advisory, compassionate words.

Um, so he wasn’t writing for. You know, anybody who bought the book, as it were, as we tend to these days, he, he was writing for communities of nuns, uh, uh, and lay [00:43:00] people, uh, that, that he was effectively, you know, confessor to, spiritual advisor to. And so there’s something again about, you know, when we venture into speech about God, to do it mindful of the need of the individual to whom we’re speaking.

And that is one reason I think, Pete, why, um, even those who know about the apophatic tradition, don’t always preach it from the pulpit because, uh, it’s, um, easy to mistake, uh, and not for everybody at every time. Um, so, um. Storytelling and uh, and, and just straightforward advice, you know, when this happens, you might find it helpful to think like this.

Um, just real simple stuff actually. And, uh, a lot of the apophatic [00:44:00] writers are writing too to specific, specific audiences of people they know well. Um, and, and speaking into context, I’m really fascinated by the way, you know, completely secular discourses pick up on some of this. Now there are, there are some recent books by atheist philosophers, um, who are seeing a wisdom, uh, in the mystical tradition, the apophatic tradition.

Um, uh, if you want me to name a couple I can, um, but, uh, the, the physicists too, for whom reality is about as strange as I’m saying God is strange. Um, you know, they’re, they’re interested in what we’ve got to say. Um, and I dunno, um, if you’ve come across, but I think he’s pretty global these days. Um, I think Iain McGilchrist, who’s done a lot of work on, you know, the right, the divided brain and the way the two hemispheres work. And, and what McGilchrist wants to say among many, many other [00:45:00] things, uh, you know, is, is that it’s really important to come to things with a compassionate attitude. You know, the, the, the way of looking at reality whole is the way that loves reality and wants people to flourish. Um, and I think that’s really important in the apophatic tradition as well. 

Anna: I’m surprised by how pastoral it is because when I hear the word apophatic, I think, oh yeah, big theologians doing their own thing.

Janet: Yes. Yes. Absolutely. It does, it sounds like the kind of thing that, you know, you do in a theology degree and, and you never take outside the theology degree, don’t you? And I remember, you know, years and years ago, last century when I first started reading this stuff, um, the textbooks that were written at that time said that was what it was.

They said, oh, you know, it’s kind of a theoretical thing that says, you know, don’t get too caught up on the literal meaning of words, but, you know, basically carry on as you were, uh, et cetera. And, [00:46:00] and, and it took me a long time to realize that actually it’s not a thing about words, it’s a thing about God.

It’s a thing about how amazing and huge God is, and it’s the thing about us and how we really need to be careful about how we speak about God because of the damage we do one another as, as, as we do it. 

Anna: Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. Well, if somebody, maybe me or Pete wanted to get into, um, apophatic spirituality, what would be some good first steps?

Janet: Let go. 

Pete: I, I, okay, I did that already. Now what do I do? 

Janet: So I, well, I think a degree of reflection, uh, you know, and trust in your own journey. You know, if, if we, if each of us goes back and says, honestly, how has my faith changed over time? Um, once you plot that course, you can be pretty [00:47:00] confident that wherever you are now is not where you are going to be.

You know, and then you can start to look out, uh, at the horizon and you can start to ask, well, what are the ways in which I might need to change my understanding, develop my understanding of God. Honestly, I think it’s read the Bible more. I think it’s, think really carefully about the way Jesus told stories.

And the layer on, layer on layer of meaning. You know, read any, read any book about the parables and see that there is kind of a depth charge in there that you, you get a superficial meaning and then you realize that that won’t work, and you have to go a bit deeper. And always, it’s the dragon skin all over again.

There are popular and accessible, um, editions of the mystics. People like John of the Cross, people like Maxus, Nicholas of  Cusa, um, uh, Meister Eckheart. Uh, all of those people there are [00:48:00] groups and particularly, um, the kind of groups that, that are richly based in the monastic tradition. You know, retreat houses that have got programs that are offering retreats, dear old Richard Rohr with his, uh, you know, his Center for Action and Contemplation.

There’s a lot of stuff, uh, that he’s doing. Um, really exciting. Um, modern theologians, if reading books is your bent, uh, you know, in, in the States, I, I find Catherine Keller and Richard Kearney, uh, just fascinating, uh, what they’ve gotta say as they, they play with some of the ideas in the apophatic tradition.

But I don’t think you need, I don’t think you need to go and read a million books. Uh, that’s what we tend to like doing, uh, isn’t it? But paying attention to God and being willing to let God do God’s work in us and to put [00:49:00] the, the beautiful, domesticated, polished picture of God, to put that aside and see what happens. 

Pete: Yeah. Well, that’s a wonderful benediction, I think, uh, Janet at the end of this, uh, episode and I want to thank you for taking the time, uh, to be with us and I hope, um, there are people out there who need to hear this and I think might be longing to hear it without knowing it.

And, um, I just wanna thank you for being a part of that and their lives and in ours as well. 

Janet: Thank you for a really fun conversation.

Pete: Okay, everybody, welcome to Quiet Time with Pete and Anna. That’s right. We’re doing this together. Yeah. We just had a great episode. So, oh, so, um, Anna, what, like, what hit you here from this episode? Just, just riff on what- I could talk for an hour about this stuff. This is just so fascinating, but what, uh, right, what a couple highlights for you, what hit you?[00:50:00] 

Anna: Well, I think one of the things that really stuck out to me, um, I, I was pretty uncomfortable with this concept going into it. The, this whole idea of unsaying things about God and I, and it seemed like more of a mental exercise. Um, just kind of like, I don’t know, like, let me, okay, let me sit here and say “God is a rock.”

And then be like, well, how is God not a rock, you know, and seem more cerebral. But talking with Janet, um, it, it let me in on number one, how, how pastoral this is, but just number two, how this is a, um, an enriching practice that. I don’t know, I don’t even know how to say it. An enriching practice for everyday people, because it did, when I was first thinking about it, it sounded so lofty.

And then as we talked about it more and more, I was like, oh no, that’s something that I can do. I can, I can introduce that into, into my own life. So yeah, I mean, what stood out to you? [00:51:00] 

Pete: A lot. I mean, just that very thing. The reason it’s new or maybe even off-putting for people and people come by this, I think honestly and, and especially in the western evangelical-slash-fundamentalist tradition, but not just there, also the, the, the mainline church tradition, you know, that’s gone way back.

But words are very important. Words are what you use to parse meaning, uh, very uh, getting down to the fine, uh, brass tacks and the better words you have, the clearer you’re going to have a handle on, on God or faith or the Bible or Jesus. And, you know, what if that’s not true? What if, what if all these words are just placeholders?

They’re just as, as, uh, Janet said, arrows pointing in a certain direction that both say something, but at the same time are saying that your words are [00:52:00] inadequate. You know, God is love. I was gonna ask her about, what about Jesus is Lord? Well, even that, you know, because we had a discussion at Eastern when we were, uh, like reworking our statement of faith and you know, saying, you know, Jesus is Lord and one of our professors who’s from South Africa said the overtones of that word, Lord, in certain contexts, it’s like it’s hard for people to get around and those words are in a sense adequate for some, but they’re not adequate or even difficult just like father is difficult for some.

So, but it’s a hard thing for people to wrap their heads around. I think because of our being used to, I, I think we can call it an intellectualized, uh, essence of Christianity, which is true of, let’s say in the West, the liberals and the fundamentalists, at the same time, we’re playing the same sort of word game, you know?

And, and if there’s another way to do this, [00:53:00] frankly, I’m all ears at this point. You know, I’m just, the words are just getting old and, and, uh, so it’s some pretty life-giving to me to think in, in different kinds of terms. 

Anna: Yeah. And to think also, ’cause I, I like how you brought that up, that both, um, fundamentalists and liberals can be kind of fundamentalist about the words that we attribute to God. And I loved her emphasis on compassion, that when you’re doing theology and spirituality. If you’re writing for a certain group of people, you do that with compassion and that probably, I, I think she would say even self-compassion. 

Pete: Yes. 

Anna: You know? Yeah. Yeah. And I just, and I love that image of Moses walking up Mount Sinai into the storm.

You know, like, what if that was how we conceptualize getting closer to God is just walking further and further into a storm where things are darker and darker and you know, less and less? But also [00:54:00] more and more.

Pete: And also maybe a little more scared as you’re doing it, you know, and, and, and in a good sense of the word, you know?

Um, I mean, have I domesticated God? Yeah, absolutely. Yeah. There’s no question. I do it all the time and I just like being reminded, you know, that, eh, pump the brakes there, Pete, you know, this, this is not how this is done. And, uh, but you know, and, what do you think about this though? Um, getting back to the Bible, to scripture, we’re both biblical scholars. 

And, we understand the contextual nature of it and all. And um, when Janet said, well, there are two creation stories out. Yeah. And, and two different takes on monarchy. And there are four gospels. And I was thinking, and there are also two flood stories that are, that are woven into one. And it’s hard for me to explain that in other ways, other than, well that’s part of the, the editing process.

This is an ancient cultural thing that they’re doing. [00:55:00] And, you know, I’m, I’m not sure it, it just, it’s a messy example in the Bible that’s sort of, for my mind, it doesn’t defy Janet’s explanation, but it complicates it greatly. So I don’t, I don’t know. What do you think about like, the role of the Bible?

Do you have any thoughts on that in this whole apophatic or contemplative, uh, tradition? 

Anna: Well, I almost fell outta my chair when she said people need to read the Bible more. Because sometimes that’s right. Sometimes I, I know sometimes I do think that sometimes I’m like, oh yeah, people absolutely should.

And then other times I’m like, I don’t trust you. I don’t trust you to read the Bible. Um, but I think when she said it, she said something like, people need to read the Bible more and take it seriously. Um, ’cause I think that just the very act of reading the Bible, it forces you into, into that unsaying.

Um, one of the things that my husband and I like to do with our children, when we talk about, um, the two creation [00:56:00] stories or the two flood stories, or even the four gospels is we’ll say, “yeah. And that’s one really good way of telling the story. And here’s another one.”

And, and then, you know, if you’re doing creation, you can do first creation story second, and then, and also evolution.

Or, and also this other culture’s creation narrative. All of this can get at more of, you know, the way that God is.

Pete: I, or cutting Rahab in half like the Psalms or Job have, you know, that, that throw that into the whole discussion of, of the biblical multi vocality of, of, uh, of creation.

Anna: Absolutely. Like what a beautiful image of creation. You’re slaughtering a sea monster and that is amazing. 

Pete: Yeah. Yeah. But I don’t know, I, it’s, I, I still struggle with, um, I mean, in a good way. I’m not manic about it, but just like, how does the Bible function in life of the spirit and reading [00:57:00] it a lot. Like you said, you know, you’re sort of put off by I was a little bit, don’t say that too loudly, but there’s some people, I want them to walk away from the Bible for a long time and not come back. 

But I, but I think what she was implying is, and what you’re saying too, is people who read the Bible with, let’s say a certain mindset and that mindset is not to master this text so I have the right theology.

It’s actually to be curious and to explore and to let, to let God speak to you in unexpected ways that can unsettle you, for example. So, and that’s it. You read it more and you pay attention to things like parables or psalms and you realize like the medieval interpreters knew the surface meaning is there, but it’s really boring.

It’s the stuff that’s beneath it that’s actually important. And I just, I lament that that’s lost on a lot of the, the conservative Protestant western church. And that’s, that’s, that’s a shame. And uh, I think I’ve suffered from [00:58:00] that as well for a good part of my life. But anyway, but I love talking about this.

This was great. 

Anna: Yeah. Yeah. And it reminded me too of um, just kind of that more mystical take on things. Um, it reminded me of approaching the Bible less like you and I have maybe been trained to do. Or even growing up maybe we learned to do, and which is to treat it like stone. Right? Like it’s got the, the commandments written in stone there and they’re gonna tell me exactly what to do, but, um, but instead treat it like bread.

Um, and that’s something there to nourish us and to get us closer into that storm Right. To lead us deeper, um, up Mount Sinai. Yeah. 

Pete: So, well, that’s great. Much more to say about this. Maybe we can have Janet back on again to like, take any one of these topics to do a much deeper dive. That’d be fine.

Anna: I think that’d be great. 

Pete: All righty. Alright folks. See ya. 

Jared: Well, thanks to everyone who supports the show. If you wanna support what we do, there are three ways you can do it. One, if you just want to give a little money, go to thebiblefornormalpeople.com/give.  [00:59:00]

Pete: And if you wanna support us and want an all-access pass for our classes, ad-free livestreams of the podcast, and a thoughtful community of people asking tough questions about the Bible and faith, you can become a member of our online community, the Society of Normal People at www.thebiblefornormalpeople.com/join. 

Jared: And lastly, it goes a long way if you just wanted to rate the podcast, leave a review, and tell others about our show. In addition, you can let us know what you thought about the episode by emailing us at info@thebiblefornormalpeople.com. 

Stephen: You’ve just made it through another episode of Faith for Normal people. Don’t forget you can catch our other show, the Bible for Normal People, in the same feed wherever you get your podcasts. This episode was brought to you by the Bible for Normal People team: Brittany Hodge, Stephen Henning, Joel Limbauan, Savannah Locke, Melissa Yandow, Tessa Stultz, Danny Wong, Lauren O’Connell, and Naiomi Gonzalez.

Janet: Somebody once said there is, there is a difference actually. Sorry, I’m, I’m hearing funny noises, are you hearing funny noises as well? So do we need to pause for a second? 

Anna:  I think we, I think- 

Janet: Do we know what it is? 

Pete: Is it, is it a, is it a humming noise? 

Janet: Yeah. 

Pete: There, there’s a, there is a leaf blower outside my window and they’re moving as we speak.

Anna: Oh, no. 

Pete: I, I think that shows a little bit of humanity in the podcast. 

Janet: You think it’s an angelic intervention? 

Pete: I’m sorry about that. I’ll ask that. I’ll ask that question about the Bible again. 

Janet: Okay. And I can’t remember what I was saying. So I’ll say something different in response.

Pete: Yeah, it’s, it’s okay. It’s apophatic—

Pete: Anyway, we dunno what we’re talking about. Okay. We’re so awesome, Anna. We’re amazing. This is so professional. 

Anna: I know. 

Pete: [01:01:00] It’s so, it must be intimidating to the rest of the people, how good we are at this.