God As Unknowable

[kdewolf2]

I've always heard that God is infinitely perfect and must be infinitely greater than any thought, image, or conception I can form of him, and this strikes me as a perfectly reasonable opinion to hold of God. I could not believe in a God who were merely a finite entity or who could be comprehended by a finite mind.

However, it struck me the other day that God would then be strictly incomprehensible, and that means he would be essentially unknowable, and whatever we could say about God would be inherently false. We couldn't even begin to fathom who or what God is, or what it even means for God to exist, and since any thoughts, images, or conceptions we held of God would fall infinitely short of his being, they would be essentially false.

It would also be impossible to affirm anything of God, that would not fall infinitely short of his being. God may be an infinite reality but the concept of God would then be shorn of any content intelligible to the human mind, and thusly God would, from a human perspective, be essentially an empty word.

I am familiar with the distinction between positive theology, negative theology, and analogical theology; however it strikes me that positive theology would not be appropriate to an infinite Deity who is infinitely greater than any conceptual knowledge of finite entities.

Negative theology would be more plausible, since we could then affirm what God is "not," rather than what God is, which is unknowable, however it strikes me that without a clear understanding of what a thing is, it is not appropriate to make dogmatic claims about what it is not.

Analogical theology, as far as I understand it, considers it appropriate to speak of God in terms of analogies, or likenesses; however, it would seem that any analogy would be infinitely more unlike God than like him, and therefore it would still be essentially false.

I guess the underlying thought here, is that if God is truly infinite, he could never enter into human knowledge or experience; we could only know or experience a "simulacrum" or a finite representation of God, which would still fall infinitely short of God himself, and would therefore be essentially an idol.

[dairygirl4u2c]

i think we can know things of God. it's never perfect of course, generally speaking. if we say... God is part of our being.... just because we can't know everything of God though, doesn't mean we can't know that there is some truth to that. i guess my point is that you said "everything we say is false"... and this might be true, but there's degrees of knowing and truth moreso in some things than others... and it would be wrong to simply throw your hands up and say since we can't know God completely that understanding him can't be pursued andor is pointless.
plus when we say something like "God is"... i think we can say that that is simply true... or if wrong on that one statement... there's got to be some things, that we capture next to perfectly, albeit with merely a human understanding we'd never know the full implications of it... but i think it's way up there, some things are.

Edited June 15, 2008 by dairygirl4u2c

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='kdewolf2' post='1571738' date='Jun 15 2008, 12:58 PM']I guess the underlying thought here, is that if God is truly infinite, he could never enter into human knowledge or experience; we could only know or experience a "simulacrum" or a finite representation of God, which would still fall infinitely short of God himself, and would therefore be essentially an idol.[/quote]

That's why we have Scriptures - it's important for us to remember that the Bible was inspired by the Holy Spirit. God, for example, really simplified the creation of the universe for us because - exactly as you said - we're finite beings who cannot possibly make sense of an infinite God. Of course, He wants us to understand as much as we can (as humans). I feel that when Genesis says "God created man in his image; in the divine image he created him; male and female he created them" (Gen 1:27), God is trying to simplify Himself (for lack of a better term) for us, so we can construct some sort of visualization. And, us calling God "Father" helps even more because He's very personal, and we apply father-like characteristics to Him to better understand His nature. Furthermore, He represents Himself to us through Jesus. We see Jesus as holy, humble, loving, serving, forgiving, etc. While Jesus came to us to save us, He also made it easier for us to understand God the Father.

You've brought up a pretty deep and philosophical argument, and it's fascinating to ponder these things. We can only get so far before we pause and say "Wait, huh?" because it [i]is[/i] beyond our comprehension, but we have tools (like Scripture and the Church) to help us out.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='kdewolf2' post='1571738' date='Jun 15 2008, 09:58 AM']However, it struck me the other day that God would then be strictly incomprehensible, and that means he would be essentially unknowable, and whatever we could say about God would be inherently false. We couldn't even begin to fathom who or what God is, or what it even means for God to exist, and since any thoughts, images, or conceptions we held of God would fall infinitely short of his being, they would be essentially false.[/quote]
[b]What[/b] God is cannot be known, for He is utterly transcendent in essence, but [b]who[/b] He is can be known – at least to a limited degree – for He has seen fit to reveal Himself to man through the incarnation of the eternal Logos. Moreover, [b]that[/b] He exists has also been made manifest through the divine energies, which penetrate and sustain creation.

That said, St. Gregory of Nyssa elucidated the Eastern Christian position on this issue in one of his [i]Sermons on the Beatitudes[/i] (Sermon 6) when he explained that:

[quote][size=3]The Divine Nature, whatever It may be in Itself, surpasses every mental concept. For It is altogether inaccessible to reasoning and conjecture, nor has there been found any human faculty capable of perceiving the incomprehensible; for we cannot devise a means of understanding inconceivable things. Therefore, the great Apostle calls His ways unsearchable, meaning by this that the way that leads to knowledge of the Divine Essence is inaccessible to thought. That is to say, none of those who have passed through life before us has made known to the intelligence so much as a trace by which might be known what is above knowledge.

Since such is He whose nature is above every nature, the Invisible and Incomprehensible is seen and apprehended in another manner. Many are the modes of such perception. For it is possible to see Him who has made all things in wisdom by way of inference through the wisdom that appears in the universe. It is the same as with human works of art where, in a way, the mind can perceive the maker of the product that is before it, because he has left on his work the stamp of his art. In this, however, is seen not the nature of the artist, but only his artistic skill which he has left impressed on his handiwork. Thus also, when we look at the order of creation, we form in our mind an image not of the essence, but of the wisdom of Him who has made all things wisely. And if we consider the cause of our life, that He came to create man not from necessity, but from the free decision of his goodness, we say that we have contemplated God by this way, that we have apprehended his goodness – so again, not his essence, but his goodness. It is the same with all other things that raised the mind to transcendent goodness, all these we can term apprehensions of God, since each one of these sublime meditations places God within our sight. For power, purity, constancy, freedom from contrariety – all these engrave on the soul the impress of the divine and transcendent mind. Hence it is clear through what has just been said that the Lord speaks the truth when he promises that God will be seen by those who have a pure heart; nor does Paul deceive when he asserts in his letters that no one has seen God, nor can he see him. For he is invisible by nature, but becomes visible in his energies, for he may be contemplated in the things that are referred to him. [St. Gregory of Nyssa, [i]Sixth Sermon on the Beatitudes[/i]][/size][/quote]

[quote name='kdewolf2' post='1571738' date='Jun 15 2008, 09:58 AM']It would also be impossible to affirm anything of God, that would not fall infinitely short of his being. God may be an infinite reality but the concept of God would then be shorn of any content intelligible to the human mind, and thusly God would, from a human perspective, be essentially an empty word.[/quote]
It is impossible to say anything about the divine essence, for as St. Basil said, "[God's] energies are various, and [His] essence simple, but we say that we know our God from His energies, but do not undertake to approach near to His essence. His energies come down to us, but His essence remains beyond our reach." [St. Basil, [i]Letter 234[/i]]

[quote name='kdewolf2' post='1571738' date='Jun 15 2008, 09:58 AM']I am familiar with the distinction between positive theology, negative theology, and analogical theology; however it strikes me that positive theology would not be appropriate to an infinite Deity who is infinitely greater than any conceptual knowledge of finite entities.

Negative theology would be more plausible, since we could then affirm what God is "not," rather than what God is, which is unknowable, however it strikes me that without a clear understanding of what a thing is, it is not appropriate to make dogmatic claims about what it is not.

Analogical theology, as far as I understand it, considers it appropriate to speak of God in terms of analogies, or likenesses; however, it would seem that any analogy would be infinitely more unlike God than like him, and therefore it would still be essentially false.[/quote]
Apophatic theology applies properly to the divine essence, which is [i]adiastemiic[/i] and consequently utterly transcendent and unknowable; while kataphatic theology applies to the uncreated divine energies that manifest God's presence in the world. Thus, at the level of energetic being God can be described, but not defined.

[quote name='kdewolf2' post='1571738' date='Jun 15 2008, 09:58 AM']I guess the underlying thought here, is that if God is truly infinite, he could never enter into human knowledge or experience; we could only know or experience a "simulacrum" or a finite representation of God, which would still fall infinitely short of God himself, and would therefore be essentially an idol.[/quote]
God is not merely infinite; instead, He is as St. Maximos said, "Infinitely beyond the infinite," for the divine essence or nature is ". . . infinitely beyond every essence, power, and act." [St. Maximos, [i]Chapters on Knowledge[/i], First Century, no. 2]

Edited June 15, 2008 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

More from St. Gregory of Nyssa on the incomprehensibility of the divine essence:

[quote][size=3]What does it mean that Moses entered the darkness and then saw God in it? What is now recounted seems somehow to be contradictory to the first theophany, for then the Divine was beheld in light but now he is seen in darkness. Let us not think that this is at variance with the sequence of things we have contemplated spiritually. Scripture teaches by this that religious knowledge comes at first to those who receive it as light. Therefore what is perceived to be contrary to religion is darkness, and the escape from darkness comes about when one participates in light. But as the mind progresses and, through an ever greater and more perfect diligence, comes to apprehend reality, as it approaches more nearly to contemplation, it sees more clearly what of the divine nature is uncontemplated.

For leaving behind everything that is observed, not only what sense comprehends but also what the intelligence thinks it sees, it keeps on penetrating deeper until by the intelligence’s yearning for understanding it gains access to the invisible and the incomprehensible, and there it sees God. This is the true knowledge of what is sought; this is the seeing that consists in not seeing, because that which is sought transcends all knowledge, being separated on all sides by incomprehensibility as by a kind of darkness. Where John the sublime, who penetrated into the luminous darkness, says, "No one has ever seen God,"[b] thus asserting that knowledge of the divine essence is unattainable not only by men but also by every intelligent creature[/b]. [St. Gregory of Nyssa, [u]The Life of Moses[/u], nos. 162-163][/size][/quote]

[Apotheoun]

And again from St. Gregory of Nyssa; this time from his homilies on the [i]Canticle of Canticles[/i]:

[quote][size=3]In her [i.e., the Bride's] search she surveys the entire angelic army. And not finding among the good things there the object of her quest, she reasons thus with herself: Is it possible that my Beloved can be comprehended? “Have you seen Him whom my soul loveth?” Their [i.e., the angelic hosts] only answer to the question is silence; and by their silence they show that what she seeks is incomprehensible to them. And after she has gone about the entire supramundane city by the operation of her mind, and has not recognized her Beloved even among things spiritual and immaterial, then at last she gives up all she has found; for she realizes that what she seeks can be understood only in the very inability to comprehend His essence, and that every intelligible attribute becomes merely a hindrance to those who seek to find Him. This is why she says: “When I had a little passed by them” (Cant. 3:4), I abandoned all creatures and passed by all that is intelligible in creation; and when I gave up every finite mode of comprehension, then it was that I found my Beloved by faith. [Jean Cardinal Danielou, editor, [u]From Glory to Glory: Texts from Gregory of Nyssa's Mystical Writings[/u], page 202][/size][/quote]

Edited June 16, 2008 by Apotheoun

[Autumn Dusk]

of course we can't know God...he's invisible...well he did that "sending his son" thing a few thousand years ago...but I don't see god around now.

[Deb]

I see God everywhere. I see him in others. I see him in Mass. I feel him all the time. God is present in every living thing. He breathes within me. He lifts me up. He holds me. He touches me from the inside out. He transforms me. He is joy. He is peace. He is truly all that is of light. To me, he is the most visible, real, part of my existence. Everything in my life before him and not of him is the illusion.

In our humanity, we could never handle the full sight or indwelling of God. We are not capable of withstanding that. One little touch is enough to know his power and that is not even explainable.

Edited June 23, 2008 by Deb

[mortify]

Our finite minds can understand God imperfectly through a multiplicity of concepts. It wont be until the just enter heaven and God supernaturally lifts their intellects to know Him as He is, that we will see What we worship. God's essence will remain incomprehensible, though.

[Deb]

I think we will truly become one with God and we will be part of his essence.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Deb' post='1580152' date='Jun 23 2008, 09:19 AM']I think we will truly become one with God and we will be part of his essence.[/quote]
The Eastern Christian tradition rejects the idea that there can be any form of participation in the divine essence, because such a concept ultimately involves a form of pantheism.

Click the link below for more information on the doctrine of [i]theosis[/i] in the Byzantine tradition:

[url="http://www.geocities.com/apotheoun/theosis"][u]Theosis: Incarnation and Divinization[/u][/url]

[Deb]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1580420' date='Jun 23 2008, 04:42 PM']The Eastern Christian tradition rejects the idea that there can be any form of participation in the divine essence, because such a concept ultimately involves a form of pantheism.

Click the link below for more information on the doctrine of [i]theosis[/i] in the Byzantine tradition:

[url="http://www.geocities.com/apotheoun/theosis"][u]Theosis: Incarnation and Divinization[/u][/url][/quote]


I don't think that is what I am talking about at all. I certainly don't believe that because we have the Holy Spirit active within us, that it makes us Gods or Godlike. What I mean is that once we die and we are drawn up to God in heaven. We will then be so bound up in the power and supreme Love of God, that we shall become one with him.

Jesus said, in John, 17: I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word; that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me. "The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one; I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected in unity, so that the world may know that You sent Me, and loved them, even as You have loved Me. Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.

God sent us the Holy Spirit and he dwells within us. The Holy Spirit is God so, I guess I don't understand how we could not be some type of participant in his divinity. I really have not learned anything on this matter though. I can only tackle one thing at a time.

So, what is it then when God lifts you up in prayer and engulfs you with his power or presence and you are no longer a participant of your own body but, only the pure Love of God. Wouldn't that be participating in his divine essense? I really don't know what anything is called. Maybe I am just using the wrong words. Sometimes I just make up words if I encounter something I don't know anything about.

I guess my bottom line is that I believe God is knowable, to a degree and only to that which, in our humanity, we are capable of experiencing. I find him much more knowable and understandable than a whole lot of this world.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Deb' post='1580809' date='Jun 23 2008, 06:33 PM']I don't think that is what I am talking about at all. I certainly don't believe that because we have the Holy Spirit active within us, that it makes us Gods or Godlike. What I mean is that once we die and we are drawn up to God in heaven. We will then be so bound up in the power and supreme Love of God, that we shall become one with him.[/quote]
In the Byzantine tradition salvation is divinization ([i]theosis[/i]), for as St. Athanasios said, "God became man, so that man might become God."

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Deb' post='1580809' date='Jun 23 2008, 06:33 PM']. . .

God sent us the Holy Spirit and he dwells within us. The Holy Spirit is God so, I guess I don't understand how we could not be some type of participant in his divinity.

. . .[/quote]
Both scripture and tradition assert that a Christian becomes a participant in divinity (i.e., divine energy), but this does not mean that he participates in the divine essence, because that would involve his becoming God by nature rather than by grace (i.e., energy). Now this doctrine is confirmed by St. Maximos the Confessor who explained in one of his treatises that, "The saints receive the same energy as God," (St. Maximos, [i]Ambigua[/i], PG XCI, 1076BC), and in the process they are divinized (cf. St. Gregory Palamas, [i]Triads[/i] III, 2:12; and [i]Dialogue Between an Orthodox and a Barlaamite[/i], no. 49).

In fact divinization is the whole point of the sacraments of initiation, but the sacraments do not impart the incommunicable divine essence, not do they impart a share in the subsistence of any one of the three divine hypostases; instead, the sacraments give a man a real participation in the energies of the Spirit, and in the process he becomes a son of God in the only-begotten Son of God (cf., John 1:12-13; and the [u]Catechism of the Catholic Church[/u], no. 1999).

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Deb' post='1580809' date='Jun 23 2008, 06:33 PM']So, what is it then when God lifts you up in prayer and engulfs you with his power or presence and you are no longer a participant of your own body but, only the pure Love of God. Wouldn't that be participating in his divine essense?[/quote]
No, divine love is not the divine essence; instead, it is a divine energy. The divine essence is beyond anything that man can conceive, and so it is not reducible to any one of God's energies (i.e., His love, mercy, justice, glory, light, goodness, etc.). As St. Gregory of Nyssa said in the quotation I provided earlier in this thread, ". . . if we consider the cause of our life, that He came to create man not from necessity, but from the free decision of his goodness, we say that we have contemplated God by this way, that we have apprehended his goodness – so again, not his essence, but his goodness." God's energies reveal His providential love and guidance, but God is beyond any one of His energies, while being wholly present in them all.