Thoughts from Mark "Hat" Rackley

Then there came a voice from above the vault over their heads as they stood with lowered wings. Above the vault over their heads was what looked like a throne of lapis lazuli, and high above on the throne was a figure like that of a man. I saw that from what appeared to be his waist up he looked like glowing metal, as if full of fire, and that from there down he looked like fire; and brilliant light surrounded him. Like the appearance of a rainbow in the clouds on a rainy day, so was the radiance around him.
This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord. When I saw it, I fell facedown, and I heard the voice of one speaking.

• Ezekiel 1:25-28

The foundations of the city walls were decorated with every kind of precious stone. The first foundation was jasper, the second sapphire, the third agate, the fourth emerald, the fifth onyx, the sixth ruby, the seventh chrysolite, the eighth beryl, the ninth topaz, the tenth turquoise, the eleventh jacinth, and the twelfth amethyst. The twelve gates were twelve pearls, each gate made of a single pearl. The great street of the city was of gold, as pure as transparent glass.

• Revelation 21:19-21

“Apophaticism is, therefore, a criterion: the sure sign of an attitude of mind conformed to truth. in this sense all true theology is fundamentally apophatic… [Apophaticism] is an expression of that fundamental attitude which transforms the whole of theology into a contemplation of the mysteries of revelation. It is not a branch of theology, a chapter, or an inevitable introduction on the incomprehensibility of God from which one passes unruffled to a doctrinal exposition in the usual terminology of human reason and philosophy in general. (The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, Chapter 7.)
“If we look at the Bible we find both the positive and the negative ways. Most of the statements about God are expressed positively, but this is not unqualified. Ezekiel 1.28 is a good example. Ezekiel has a vision of God, but then concludes that ‘this was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD’. It was not the LORD, not the glory of the LORD, not even the likeness of the glory of the LORD but only the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD! This warns us against imagining that our talk about God is an exact and perfect account. To suppose this would be idolatry, equating the infinite Creator with the formulations of a finite creature. We do see now — but ‘a poor reflection in a mirror’ as Paul put it (1 Corinthians 13.12). A recognition of the abiding mystery of God instils humility and helps us to avoid the arrogance of those who imagine that they know it all, an arrogance that is not unknown in the Evangelical tradition. But the negative way functions best when (as in the Bible) it serves as a timely qualification to an essential positive approach, not when it takes over as the primary approach. ‘Thomas Aquinas’s teaching on analogy is a good example of how talk about God can avoid being exclusively positive (univocal) or exclusively negative (equivocal).”

• Tony Lane, A Concise History of Christian Thought

Vladimir Lossky (1903-1958) was a theologian in the Russian Orthodox faith.  He studied philosophy in Saint Petersburg, Russia until the Communists deposed him in 1922.  He then studied in Prague, finally finishing his studies at the Sorbonne in Paris, completing his degree in Medieval Philosophy in 1927.

While Gregory Palamas argued that we can know the unknowable from a spiritual sense, Vladimir Lossky focuses on Apophaticism and our inability to “know”.  In the Orthodox Church, Apophaticism limits our knowledge of the truth so that truth is distinguished without distortion.  Thus, the example used in the quote above.  Ezekiel clarifies what he saw in his vision as “the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord.”  It was not the glory of the Lord or the likeness of the glory of the Lord.  It was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord.

While I am of the camp that we can know a great deal about the attributes of God, I am with Apophaticism when it comes to interpreting the visions that are found in the Bible.  Ezekiel states that the throne was “like lapis lazuli.”  Was it lapis lazuli or the throne was made of a gemstone that was of that color?  Or was the throne so glorious and made with materials not found on earth that Ezekiel just used words that were available to him and his vocabulary?

I have heard many people state that the Apostle John saw that the streets of the New Jerusalem were made of transparent gold.  For one thing, that is not even the NIV (or many other translations) description, and maybe using the word “gold” was the best word John could use for something he had never seen before, too glorious for words, and that is what Apophaticism tries to avoid.

By the way, gold that is like transparent glass may be something that would never make sense to most people.

I had to examine the specification for a glass window at a nuclear facility.  It was over a foot thick.  It was lead glass, several panes of glass, with oil between each pane, and there could be no occlusions in the glass unless the occlusions were within a certain distance of the edge, and even then minimal.

What?!  The point was that people had to see through the glass with no distortions.  Thus, if you cast a lead glass panel one inch thick, there could be no impurities in it.  There could be no air bubbles in it.  An impurity or an air bubble near the edge, was an acceptable occlusion.  The nearness of the occlusion to the edge meant, close enough to be part of the frame, so there would be no occlusions in the area where you had to look through.  From what I have been told, that is not easy to make glass that pure.  Thus, the Apostle John is saying that he saw the streets paved with such perfect purity that he compared it to no gold he had ever seen here on earth.  Actually, if it were pure gold here on earth, it would be impractical as a paving material since pure gold is soft.  Yet, the concept of wearing down a surface is part of the fallenness of this earth.  In the New Jerusalem, I doubt moving parts will wear down and have to be replaced.

But to an Apophatic theologian, my surmise that the New Jerusalem is free from wearing down steps outside the realm of “truth” into theory, and theory could lead to idolatry.  Why?  Because if the theory becomes more important than what Scriptures include, then we might run the risk of creating a false Heaven, and worse a false god that happens to be named Jesus.

And I feel many have created a god, other than the true God, because they find some of the Scriptures conflict with what they want in God.  We must take all the Scripture into account, even those parts that we might find disturbing to our way of thinking.  In fact, I have done a great deal of Christian growth in wrestling with those things that I find disturbing.  When you keep your mind open to those Scriptures, you might just find the true God that is even more Holy, more powerful, and more Just than anything you could have imagined on your own.

If you like these Tuesday morning essays about philosophy and other “heavy topics,” but you think you missed a few, you can use this LINK. I have set up a page off the home page for links to these Tuesday morning posts. I will continue to modify the page as I add more.

Soli Deo Gloria.  Only to God be the Glory.