Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Catholic
Dealing With The Paradox of God: Part Three of Three

Dealing With The Paradox of God: Part Three of Three

Last updated on: August 16, 2018 at 5:36 am by Henry Karlson

Dealing With The Paradox of God: Part Three of Three 2018-08-16T05:36:52-05:00 Henry Karlson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

God is one, simple, transcendent, divine principle. We talk about God with many names, but all of them, even the name of God, indicates a concept which is less than what God is in himself. He is called “God of gods” (cf. Deut. 10:17) because the notion of Godhood is something which can be shared with and participated in all who unite themselves with him. He is the source and foundation of the divine energies which deifies creation. With such a plurality, the problem we find emerging is how we are to understand the relationship of God as one simple divine principle with the plurality which emerges from him which allows us to know him and represent him with a plurality of names. This problem is just another version of the paradox from which we began our exploration: how can we talk about God an incomprehensible God? We talk about him in and through his attributes or names which come out of his economic activity, an activity which can be seen to be without limit and so allowing for an infinite variety of names which can be predicated to God. The incomprehensible nature of God relates to the oneness of God, while the knowledge which we have of God represents the infinite variety and ways God reveals himself to us.

For Proclus, the problem is given a simple answer: the plurality is accepted as a plurality of gods which are differentiated from the transcendent One. He has no problem accepting a plurality of gods, while accepting the over-arching transcendent One which lies beyond them and beyond all being, making God truly imparticipable:

For in the first place it is clear that the One is imparticipable: were it participated, it would thereby become the unity of a particular and cease to be the cause both of existent things and of the principles prior to existence.[1]

It is the gods, the plurality which comes out of the One, which we experience and come to know, and why, for the Platonist, the gods are an important part of their cosmology even if there is the higher One which lies beyond them:

For in producing themselves the gods produced the existents, and without the gods nothing could come into being and attain to measure and order; since it is by the gods’ power that all things reach completeness, and it is from the gods that they receive order and measure. Thus even the last kinds in the realm of existence are consequent upon gods who regulate even these, who bestow even on these life and formative power and completeness of being, who convert even these upon their good; and so also in the intermediate and the primal kinds. All things are bound up in the god and deeply rooted in them;, and through this cause they are preserved in being; if anything fall away from the gods and become utterly isolated from them, it retreats into non-being and is obliterated, since it is wholly bereft of the principles which maintained its unity.[2]

For the monotheists of the Abrahamic tradition, the distinction between the one and the many is understood and accepted on a logical basis, at least in relation to the way God works and interacts with his creation. God’s infinite transcendence, the Eyn-Sof of the Kabbalah, the Essence and Reality of Al’Arabi, and the divine essence of Palamas, is the transcendent One of Proclus. Unlike Proclus, the monotheists posit that the One in its transcendence can manifest itself in and through plurality. They suggest, each in their own way, that the One must not be limited, and if the One could not manifest itself in and through plurality, it would be limited, contradicting what it means for the One to be transcendent.

The plurality which comes out of the One, manifesting the One to contingent, limited beings (whether or not they are also infinite beings, as it is possible for something to be infinite and limited as mathematical equations can demonstrate) reveals the One transcending its transcendence in a kind of self-emptying which allows it truly to be transcendent and the One which is beyond our comprehension. God reveals himself in the Sefirot, or through the veils which he establishes to indicate his qualities, or through the divine energies, giving structure to our knowledge of him. That structure, then, forms the basis by which it is possible for us to say we comprehend something about God. What we comprehend is not God in himself, but God as he reveals himself to us. It is a revelation which is truly of God, and so is truly God, but it is God as established in positive theology. By giving us something which we can comprehend, moreover, we then are given a way by which we can be united with God. His self-revelation is the means by which we are deified, lifted up beyond ourselves as we find ourselves partakers of the divine reality.

There can be nothing outside of God. This means that all things are created by God. As they are created by him, they come out of his divine activity: God is revealed in and through all created realities. God is revealed in and through us as like in a mirror, with the quality of the mirror representing the quality of that image which is produced by us. The greater our being, the more we have opened ourselves to partake of God, the greater the reflection of God, and therefore, the greater representation of God which emerges. In a way, this is what we were made for: so that God can establish his reflection in us and so find himself seen as an other through us:

The Reality wanted to see the essences of His Most Beautiful Names or, to put it another way, to see His own Essence, in an all-inclusive object encompassing the whole [divine] Command, which qualified by existence, would reveal to Him His own mystery. [3]

Our spiritual relationship with God includes contemplation of God in and through the various ways he reveals himself. God transcends all which we can say of him, so we negate what we say, allowing the absolute to absolutely transcend all names which is given unto it; but that transcendence would be false if it is limited to mere abstraction which negates all things. We negate in order to engage and unite ourselves with what is revealed by God so that we can be defied in that revelation and become partakes of the divine:

Contemplation, then, is not simply abstraction and negation; it is a union and divinization which occurs mystically and ineffably by the grace of God, after the stripping away of everything from here below which imprints itself on the mind, or rather after the cessation of all intellectual activity; it is something which goes beyond abstraction (which is only the outward mark of the cessation).[4]

It is the grace of God, which is God, that allows us to be divinized; the more we experience of that self-revealing grace of God, the more we are deified, the more we can represent God by speaking about him through names and attributes which we know properly represent and express the divine in a conventional fashion. When we speak of God, when we express what we have received in our experience of God, we know through such experience we have only found ourselves at the tip of the iceberg and that there is a great unknown Reality which lies beyond what we know and experience. This unknown is the glorious mystery of the Eyn-Sof, the mystery of the great abyss which has no end, meaning there is going to be no end of revelation from God in our experience with him. He reveals himself showing himself to be like an onion, where every layer of self-revelation is as if he removes a veil only to show an unlimited number of veils which lie beyond:

For this reason the Ruler [God] is veiled, since the Reality has described Himself as being hidden in veils of darkness, which are the natural forms, and by veils of light, which are the subtle spirits.[5]

Every veil which encounter, we can uncover to reveal another, deeper, more mysterious veil. It is the light of grace which manifests itself in a form which we can experience; the light is the veil, and beyond it is a greater light which is so bright it would blind us if we see it, so that the Reality is hidden in veils of darkness, that is, ever greater, brighter lights of grace which we cannot see or comprehend until the grace we have has prepared us for further, more subtle depths of God’s glory. God reveals himself to us in the divine light of his grace, for he is the one who truly can take off the veil. If we try to get ahead of ourselves and uncover that veil for ourselves when we are not ready, we will suffer and burn in the experience of that transcendence, as the bright darkness will overwhelm us, which is far from what God wants for us as his beloved. This, then demonstrates how and why the names themselves, qualities which can be seen represented in the veils, are not all of the same kind: some are greater than others, some which we can know and understand now, and others which we will come to know if and when we are lifted up and ready for them. Not all names, not all qualities are equal to each other, and yet, in a mysterious way, as they all manifest God, they are one and the same, because there is but one God manifested in and through all things, making him truly all in all. It is this fashion which we can begin to see the relationship between God’s transcendence, simple and one, with his economic activity, which is infinite, because the foundation and base of all such activity is that some transcendence which in its transcendence can manifest itself not only in transcendence but in self-emptying revelation.

[IMG=Divine Finger Contact With God [CC0 Creative Commons] via pixabay]

[1] Proclus, The Elements of Theology. Trans. E.R. Dodds (Oxford: Clarendon Press,1963),103. [Prop 116]

[2] Proclus, The Elements of Theology, 127. [Prop. 144]

[3] Ibn Al’Arabi, The Bezels of Wisdom. Trans R.W.J. Austin (New York: Paulist Press,1980), 50.

[4] St. Gregory Palamas, The Triads. Trans. Nicholas Gendle (New York: Paulist Press, 1983), 34-5.

[5] Ibn Al’Arabi, The Bezels of Wisdom, 56.

Stay in touch! Like A Little Bit of Nothing on Facebook

Previous Post

August 15, 2018

Dealing With the Paradox of God: Part Two of Three

Next Post

August 20, 2018 Mystical Theology of Dionysius: Transcendental God-Talk. Chapter Five. Part Nine.

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Abortion Abraham abuse Aesthetics AI Aliens Ambrose Ancestors and Everything Andrew Angels Animals Anne Anthony Antisemitism apologetics Apophatic Apostle John Aquinas Artificial Intelligence Asanga Ascension Asceticism Assumption Atheism Attachment Augustine Authority Avarice Balthasar Baptism Beauty Biden birthright citizenship Bishops Black History Books Buddhism Bulgakov Byzantine Calendar C.S. Lewis Calcidius Catholic Catholicism Catholicism Celibacy Charity Chastity children Chrismation Christ Christmas Christology Church Climate Change Common Good Communion Confession Confirmation Conscience Constantine conventions conversion councils Covid Creation Cross Dead Death Death Penalty Debate Deception Demagogues Demons Desert Monks Desert Mothers Desire destruction development Dialogue Dignity Dionsyius Dionysius Discipline Diversity Division Doctor Who doctrine dogma Dormition Dualism Easter Easter Series Ecumenical Councils Ecumenism Education Election Empathy Environment Error Eschatology eschaton Eternity Ethics Eucharist Evangelism Eve Evil evolution Faeries Faith Fear femininity Ficino Florence Florensky Folktale Fools Forgiveness Freedom Future gender Gentile Gentiles Glory Gnostic God gods Good Samaritan Goodness Gospel Government Grace Great Fast Guns Hate healing Health Heaven Hell Hellenism Heresy Hierarchy Hildegard Hinduism History Holiness Holy Spirit Holy Week Hope Horror Human rights humanity Humility hypocrisy ICE icon icons Identification Identity Idol II Nicea Immigration incarnation Individualism Informal Reflections Inklings Intention Inter-Religious Interfaith Internet Interpretation Intrinsic evil Irenaeus Islam Israel Jacob Jerome Jesus Jews John Chrysostom John of Damascus John the Baptist Joseph Judaism justice Justification kenosis Kindnesss Kingdom of God Kingdom of Heaven Law Law of Moses Lazarus Leaf by Niggle Lent Lenten Reflection Liberation Theology Lies Life Listen Literature Liturgy locutions Logic Logos Love Marriage Martyrs Mary Mass Maximos The Confessor Meanness Meditation Mercy Middle Path Migrants Mind Miracles Miriam Morals Moses Movies Music Muslims Myths Names Nationalism Native Americans New Year Nicea Nicholas Nothing Novatian Obedience Occam's Razor Ordination Origen Original Sin Orthodox orthopraxis Pagans Palamas Palm Sunday Paradise Paschaltide Paul Peace Pentecost person Peter piety PKD Plato pluralism Plurality Poem Poetry Poiltics Politics Poor Pope Pope Francis Pope Leo XIV Post Office Prayer Pride Pro-life Prodigal Son propaganda Prophecy Prophets Providence Putin Racism Reading Reason Reflection Refugees Relationships Religion Religion Series Religious Liberty Repent Republicans Rest Resurrection Rich Rites Russia Sacraments Saints Salvation Salvian Santa Science Scripture Self-Giving Sexuality Sibyl Sick Silence Sin Singlehood Social Justice Society Sodom Solovyov Speculations Spiritual Reflection St. Cyril of Alexandria St. Justin Martyr Suffering Sunday of the Paralytic Man Sunday of the Samaritan Woman Superhero Supreme Court Teaching Technology Thanksgiving The Father the Universe Theological Reflection Theology Theosis Theotokos Thomas Timaeus Time Tolerenace Tolkien Tradition Transfiguration Trinity Trump Truth Uncategorized Unity Universities USCCB Value Vatican II Vegetarian Vices Violence Virtue Vocations War Water Welcome Wisdom Womanhood Women Work World View Worship Writing Zacchaeus

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz