I. 3. B. The Communicable Attributes (Part 2)

I. Theology Proper

3. Nature and Attributes of God (Cont. . .)

B. The Communicable Attributes (Part 2)

The Communicable attributes of God are obviously the longer of the two categories, so I split it into three parts. Just as a reminder, the easiest category to understand is definitely the incommunicable because we have no predetermined suppositions or fallacies to override in our learning. This category of communicable attributes should be the harder to understand, so we need to aggressively approach it and cast aside all former knowledge of these traits (as found in ourselves, or as taught inaccurately) so that we may more clearly understand the divine essence of God. In this post I will discuss the goodness of God, and the Holiness of God.

After the next post, we will be finished with the study of the attributes of God. Obviously, this is not exhaustive, but it is all-inclusive. We have learned the major attributes which all others are related to. Some broader attributes of God need to be discussed as well to help us focus on the vastness and congeniality of His character, i.e. His perfection, beauty, blessedness, loving-kindness, and righteousness (Holiness). If we could give a name to God that could reflect all these at once (like His true character), it would be: “The True Loving, Just, Righteous ONE.” Let  these three be fleshed out and made into more specific particular attributes, and you get those that we have studied in detail in this systematic theology.

1. Goodness of God (Love)

The 4th communicable attribute of God is His goodness. This attribute contains more specific attributes in itself of benevolence, love, mercy, and grace. Benevolence is the overall disposition of promoting happiness to all creatures. Love is that promotion of happiness directed at a specific rational being. Mercy is kindness exercised toward those in distress (mercy also includes the Scriptural attributes of pity, compassion, forbearance, and gentleness.) Grace is love exercised toward the unworthy. The love of a gracious God to undeserving sinners is the most mysterious attribute of all the divine nature.

In the definition of goodness, I want to just assume that we know what good versus evil is. Philosophically, goodness is that which coincides with the character and perfection of God, i.e. the absence of evil. On this topic of goodness, much debate has occurred, and will continue to occur, on the relative “goodness” of sin. Sin is the means to a greater good, making it necessary FOR the greatest good. Is sin therefore a good? In short, no, sin is not a good. However, sin is necessary for the glory of God to be full and complete. Without sin, there would be no great contrast between the Holiness of God and the complete inability of man to achieve that holiness apart from His grace and aid. The glory of God is the ultimate end of all things, while the good of man is the subordinate or secondary end of all things. It is wrong to assume that the earth is at the center of the solar system. Our astronomy would be in confusion. If we therefore make the creature, instead of God, the end of all things, our theology and religion will also be perverted. It is therefore safe to say that the sole purpose of the universe is to make God known, not to produce man’s happiness.

The actual goodness of God means that God is the final standard for good and that all that He is and does is worthy of approval. (Luke 18:19; Ps 100:5; Ps 106:1; Ps 34:8). Why is what God approves good? Because he approves it. He IS the ultimate source of good, so if He is involved in its proof of genuine goodness, no doubt his verdict of good versus bad WILL be the true and perfect judgement. We as humans can judge right and wrong and what is inherently good, but we are not sources of goodness itself. God IS that attribute - to the max. He IS goodness. Just like we can obtain and possess knowledge, He IS knowledge. As we can possess goodness, He IS goodness. All things good come from Him (Jam 1:17). 

We see that all that God is is good, now let’s move onto the second part of the definition: all He does is good. One example of the absolute goodness of God’s actions is in the creation story (Gen 1:31). Also, Paul urges us to renew our minds to find the “good and acceptable and perfect will of God” (Rom 12:2). Another blanket text describing the goodness of God is in Rom 8:28.

In direct relation to the goodness of God is the Love of God. Some discuss this attribute separately, but I wanted to keep it with the main point for clarity and conciseness. 

God’s love means that God eternally gives himself to others. This definition assumes that love is the self giving for the benefit of others. So, in the same way that goodness is given to us finitely as a gift, remaining perfect and unblemished only in its creator and source, so is love. The love our world offers is cheap. The cheaper the love the more easily it is recognized as cheap, but all love is cheap unless it is founded and derived from its source: God.

2. Holiness of God

The holiness of God is the general term for the moral excellence of God. God is Holy (1 Sam 2:2; Ps. 49:9; Ps 111:9; Hab 1:13; Rev 40:4). Holiness contains two implications: One, that God is entirely free from moral evil; two, that there is absolute moral perfection in God. Absolute freedom from impurity is the primary idea of the word. To sanctify is to cleanse; to be Holy is to be clean. Infinite purity, even before infinite knowledge or infinite power is the object of reverence. 

Philosophically, the argument against God’s supreme attribute of moral excellence is as follows: First, for one to assume that God can delight in good, and hate evil, implies that He is able to be impressed or swayed. Any implication of relativity that we prescribe to God’s nature is inconsistent with the divine essence. Second, it is said that moral excellence implies subjection to moral law. But in the same way that God is not limited by time, distance, or knowledge, He is not limited in morality, for He is the supreme morality. All “good” morality comes from God since He is the source of the law, not under the law as we are. Third, there is a belief that all moral excellence must be free to choose between right and wrong. A moral agent, to be holy, must voluntarily do right. This view implies that God can do wrong if He desires, giving the possibility of the Absolute divine nature as we know it to be non-absolute. This is a contradiction which cannot occur in the divine essence, leaving us with the truth of the compatibility of absolute certainty (God’s absolute, immutable - unchanging - nature) and divine liberty.

In attributing moral attributes (even perfect ones) to God, we forget that he is a purely spiritual being that cannot possess wisdom, goodness, wrath, righteousness, etc; He IS all of those. They all come from HIM! 

Blogging for His glory, Adam Setser

Warren vs Piper- how to study the Bible

On the flight to CA, my time was completely capitalized by the videos and articles from John Piper's conference where he invited Rick Warren to his national conference. This invite is a big deal because their ministerial philosophies are completely opposite. Rick Warren is the author of The Purpose Driven Life, which caused quite an uproar among true bible teaching ministers like Piper, MacArthur, RC Sproul etc because of its seemingly temporal and shallow message. The video of Warren's message is HERE. The video of the analysis of the message by the panel is HERE. In that video, Piper gives his analysis of Warrens "philosophy" of ministry.

Rick Warren

John Piper

VS.

So, what is this distinct "Warren philosophy?" Here it is in a nutshell.

Piper believes that when a pastor teaches the bible in all its depth and truth that the Word will produce a Christian that becomes strong from the feeding on the Truth from the Word. The fruits of his life the come from the nourishment of the Word, not from an application-that-changes-your-life once a week. Rick Warren on the other hand believes that to lead a congregation to "being" a Christian begins when you teach them HOW to be a Christian per each application. This process is tedious because it requires the PERSON to do the application of the word and change himself accordingly- each week. SO, Rick advocates that pastors teach LESS and apply more so that that change once a week can be good solid growth leading to another fruit. This is very ANTI Piper as you can see, and honestly is, in my opinion, not what the Word tells us to do. I believe that Piper, MacArthur etc are correct in their teaching the Word in all its depth, and allowing the Spirit to apply it as the individual grows. later in life that person is still growing in the Lord as he continues to learn about God, getting stronger and stronger spiritually, becoming sanctified, while the other Warren-ite is still once a week, learning another application-that-changes-your-life.

That is the scoop, I encourage you to watch the Warren message and discern his philosophy from it. Overall, he has a good message, but his philosophy is there, just subdued (probably because he is at JOHN PIPER's conference). The more material we know the more discerning we can be about our own lives and how we are applying the Word for our growth. Are we applying every passage to one certain activity in our lives, or are we simply basking in the majesty of God in His Word, learning about Him, growing stronger in the faith and allowing the Spirit to apply in due time the truth to our lives? Rick's approach- on steroids- would point away from theological studies like ours as a waste of time because we can't APPLY it, which is the chief goal in his philosophy. In my, hopefully our, philosophy, Theology is the key to learning about God so that we can be more and more familiar with His character, so that specific application is secondary and a result, not a goal.

How are YOU studying scripture?

Blogging for His glory, Adam Setser

I. 3. B. The Communicable Attributes (Part 1)

I. Theology Proper


3. Nature and Attributes of God (Cont. . .)

B. The Communicable Attributes (Part 1)

The second category of God’s attributes are the communicable attributes, or those attributes of His character that can be shared in some limited way with human-kind, i.e. Power, goodness, truth, etc. As previously stated, the most important aspect of this categorization is to uphold superior clarity and orderliness. You don’t need to necessarily memorize the exact categorization as much as the attributes themselves and how they help attribute to the massive thatch-work of God’s being. This topic of attributes is not very standardized as to which are presented, but I will take a combination of Grudem, who presents many separate attributes, and Hodge, who is more concise, albeit meatier and philosophically exhaustive.

In Grudem’s Sytematic Theology, he further divides the “Communicable Attributes” into sub-headings based on their relation to God’s character as man would segment them. He separates them into subheadings like being, mental, moral, purpose etc. I considered following this outlines, but it simply helps to lead us into the dissecting of the person of God. We, as humans in the 21st century, are spoon fed everything to meet our mold of understanding. I understand that since these are “communicable,” or shared attributes that one could say that Grudem is not dividing God (which I believe is not his aim) but merely helping us to categorically see the parallels in our lives versus God’s nature. To which I would object that this mode of thought leads us to compare God to ourselves, our natures, etc. My aim is to look at God in a totally new way, without preconceptions and errors that would be subconsciously present in a comparison situation of infinite God and finite man  (who’s nature it is to attempt to rationally, logically understand God.) With that in mind, these below are listed logically, but not categorically. Please read and understand without any former conceptions and let the truth speak for itself, fresh in your mind. The single greatest thing we possess as true Christians is absolute truth. Let’s not waste that by applying our knowledge to His divine truth. In searching for a picture to put here of God, or of someone's conception of God, I have decided to put this picture here. Look at it and imagine the absolute depth, magnitude, power, wisdom, knowledge etc that it would take to CREATE this much less understand it. This God is far more than a just judge, or a benevolent father, or a sovereign creator; He is all of these and more! In our study of God, it is has transformed my view of God and His being. Don't let a subconscious preconception ruin that. DO NOT TRY TO RATIONALIZE GOD! Learn of Him and praise Him for being who He is! 

Disclaimer: Through this deeper study, truer, greater praise WILL RESULT causing you to look ridiculous to the world, but even more precious to God as you marvel at His greatness. (Results will vary, side effects include brain pain, a case of the so-heavenly-minded-no-earthly-good syndrome, and occasionally random acts of praise to God so that your life ends up being one big praise fest bound into a finite setting.)

1. Spirituality of God

In defining this key attribute of God, I want to begin with addressing the issue of language and interpretation. The use of language is communication. If the language intended to communicate an idea is out of date or confusing, then the language needs to be analyzed and changed to suit the proper end of the intended meaning. Therefore, I will define spirit as it was originally intended, so that true communication is upheld.

In Jesus’ day, when he used the word spirit (John 4:24) to identify the character of God’s physical being, he meant the idea of moving air, especially in the breath; then any invisible power; then the human soul. God is not flesh and blood. He is not made of matter at all; rather He is an immaterial being that is free from all laws and properties of matter. He cannot be divided, or compounded and does not have bulk form. He is invisible. If God is a spirit it is imperative that He be self-conscious, intelligent, and a voluntary agent. Also, since God is a Spirit, it follows that He is also an intelligent and moral Being. We, as humans have these characteristics because we too are spirits, therefore, it would be proper to assume that He must possess these attributes and more, lest we esteem ourselves higher and more sophisticated than God, our maker. The spirit of man is subject to change, whereas we know of God’s immutability, so He does not change. His nature is interwoven, creating a being greater than imagination, which, if simplified, destroys His majesty and takes away from His glory. 

The Scripture everywhere presents these attributes, and on these attributes a foundation is made on which all our worship, prayer, confidence in redemption, preservation and blessings lie. The God of the Bible is a person. He revealed Himself to Noah, He spoke to Adam, He covenanted with Abraham, He conversed with Moses. How? The Bible says that God gave us spirits to converse with and worship Him: (John 4:24; 1 Cor 14:14; Phil 3:3), and in which we are united with His spirit: (1 Cor 6:17) with which the Holy Spirit joins to bear witness of our adoption into God’s family: (Rom 8:16) and in which we pass into the Lord’s presence when we die: (Luke 23:46; Eccl 12:7; Heb 12:23). With this in mind, it is clear how God’s spirituality is labelled as a Communicable attribute.

Along with God’s Spirituality comes the attribute of invisibility. These two go directly together in my mind, so I will not discuss them separately. Basically, invisibility means that we will never see God. We (as humans in this finite world) have seen theophanies (appearances of God) when He appeared to Abraham (Gen 18:1-33), Jacob (Gen 32:28-30), the people of Israel as a pillar of cloud and fire (Ex 13:21-22). Also, God came in human form through His son, Jesus. Jesus said that “He who has seen me has seen the Father” (John 14:9). So we know that God can present Himself to us in someway, but His total essence will never be seen by us.

2. Knowledge (Omniscience)

Many philosophical debates and theories have risen on the subject of God’s omniscience. Some believe that God cannot know because with the idea of knowledge comes the implication of the knower versus the learner, i.e. God cannot know, or perceive something from a source. Knowledge must originate and be learned through deduction, instruction, observation, comparison, etc. This is the nature of knowledge. So, can there be knowledge in God? Can there be a distinction between subject and object in an absolute and infinite Being? This question is answered in Scripture. The Bible teaches that knowledge in God, is essentially what knowledge is in us, but perfect. If you take an attribute that we share with God into examination, it is always going to come with the imperfections that we know as humans. God’s knowledge is perfect, complete, full. There is no object and subject within God to possess knowledge since He is knowledge. The vast procession of events, thoughts, feelings, and acts, stands open in his view. He knows all things as they are. (Ps 89:1-2, Prov 15:3; Prov 15:11; Ps 147:5; Ezek 11:5; Acts 15:18; Matt 10:30.)

3. Truth of God- Faithful

The definition of truth can be stated in four sections. First, truth is that which is real, opposed to that which is fake. Jehovah is the true God, because he is really God while the gods of the heathen are not true, having neither attributes nor existence. Second, that truth completely fulfills what it claims to be. The true God is he in whom is found all that Godhead imports. Third, truth in life agrees with the declaration. God is true, because He really is what he claims to be; because He is what He commands us to believe Him to be; and because all His declarations correspond to what really is. Fourth, the truth can be depended on to never fail, change, or disappoint. God is true as He is immutable and faithful. His Word abideth forever.

This truth of God is the basis for our religion. Were it not for God’s absolute truth we would have no means to worship him over other gods who claim to be truth just as Jehovah does. God is the one true God (John 17:3; 1 John 5:20). Since God is the only being in his class, HE sets the standard for the Godhead. We, as humans, cannot assume we are the source of the knowledge of God as Godhead. We have had this limited knowledge placed inside us as by God himself. Were God not the source of all veracity (truthfulness or reliability) his character would be degraded into that which is moved by the same swaying, variable truth of other gods.

Blogging for His glory, Adam Setser

I. 3. A.-The Incommunicable Attributes

I. Theology Proper

3. Nature and Attributes of God

A. The Incommunicable Attributes

We have previously learned how the knowledge of God is exhibited in creation, but more clearly and familiarly in the Word of God. Through the Scriptures we see the nature of God taught through His works. This discussion of God’s nature is infinitely massive, but we will look at an index of His works, categorically, with hopes of leading you to a structure of Biblical study where you can search for and identify different categories of His nature during your intimate study of Him in His written revelation of Himself. 

As one could imagine, the categorization of such a huge topic varies according to time period and personality of the reader. Even though all categorizations vary significantly, they all attempt to do the same thing, i.e. Present God’s nature in an orderly and clear fashion. Which theory of categorization you choose doesn’t matter much because there has been no sufficient evidence to promote one method as superior over the rest. However, for this study, I will use the system of categorization (that Grudem uses) which is the simplest and most logical. It separates the attributes of God into two different categories based on their relationship with God and man. The first is incommunicable attributes, i.e. Those attributes of God which are distinctly God’s, not shared (communicated) with man. The second is communicable attributes, i.e. Those attributes of God which man can identify with in some limited way and are thus “communicated” between man and God.

In Scripture, there are three main attributes of God that override all others and are sufficient enough, if studied by themselves, to lead a person to understand the person of God better. These three are loving-kindness, on which are entire safety and well-being exists; judgement, which is daily exercised on the wicked, and awaits them in more severity for eternal destruction; and righteousness, by which the faithful are preserved and cherished. These attributes can be further expanded into truth, power, holiness, and goodness. These all rely on the above three, which, if true, produce the lower plus even more that coincide with the perfection attributed in the above three. Therefore, with these three uncategorized and seemingly simple attributes, we are adequately furnished with the means of glorifying God. However, in an attempt to understand God greater and deeper which makes our relationship still sweeter and more meaningful, read on as we will delve deeper into the infinite topic of God’s nature.

Incommunicable Attributes:

The incommunicable attributes of God are probably the easiest to understand because we cannot relate to them at all. There are no pre-conceived ideas in our minds to muddle our thoughts or provide confusion. In an attempt to cut down on this massive task, I may list some attributes with minimal definitions. If you want more clarity on a particular point, let me know (aka: COMMENT!)

1. Independence

God’s independence is defined as follows: God does not rely on the creation for anything, yet the creation can glorify Him and bring Him joy. God is absolutely independent and self-sufficient. (Acts 17:24-25): God needs nothing from mankind. (Job 41:11): No one has ever contributed anything to God that did not first come from Himself. God, as a being, is totally unique. It is not that God does not need the creation for anything, but He could not need the creation for anything. The fact that we bring God joy infers that our life is not meaningless. (Isa 43:7): God made us for a significant purpose, i.e. HIS GLORY- (also: Eph 1:11-12; Rev 4:11).

2. Immutability

Immutable means unchanging, or not subject to change. Let me make a few factual statements of God’s immutability then come back and address a couple. God is absolutely immutable in his essence and attributes. He can neither increase nor decrease. He is exalted above all other causes. He is subject to no process of development, or of self-evolution. His knowledge and power can never be greater or less. He can never be wiser or holier, or more righteous or more merciful than He ever has been and ever must be. He is no less immutable in His plans and purposes. (James 1:17; Num 23:19; Mal 3:6; Ps 33:11; Proc 19:21; Is 14:24; Is 46:9-10). One objection to His absolute immutability are the Scriptures in which anthropomorphic language is in use, i.e. Language that gives human characteristics to God so that we can understand Him (God repented that he ever made the Israelites). This language is not literal, but anthropomorphic. Were it literal, it would imply that God changed his mind, therefore nullifying His immutability. Thus, this type language is very important to understand and not mis-interpret. Other exemplary texts are as follows: Gen 6:6; 1 Sam 15:10; Jonah 3:10, and etc.

3. Eternity

The infinitude of God relative to space is his immensity or omnipresence- which we will discuss below. That infinitude relative to duration is His eternity which we will now discuss. As he is free from all limitations of space, so He is exalted above all the limitations of time. With Him there is no distinction between the past, present and future; all things are equally and always present to him. With him duration is an eternal now. This is the scriptural view of His eternity. (Ps 90:2; Ps 102:25-27; Is 62:15; Is 44:6; Ps. 90:4; 2 Peter 3:8; Heb 13:8; Rev 1:4; etc) He is called the eternal or everlasting God; who only hath immortality. The primary revelation of Himself to His covenant people was as the “I AM.”

4. Omnipresence

The second form of God’s infinitude is His omnipresence. It goes hand-in-hand with the previous point. God is not only unlimited in time, he is unlimited in space. The definition of omnipresence is as follows: God does not have size or spatial dimensions and is present at every point of space with his whole being, yet God acts differently in different places. Deut 10:14 gives evidence to God’s lordship over space.

5. Unity

Figure 1

The doctrine of unity is defined as follows: God is not divided into parts, yet we see different attributes of God emphasized at different times. This doctrine has also been referred to as simplicity, meaning that less than common meaning of “not complex” or “not composed of parts.” But, this word has now been dumbed down to refer to an object as “easily understood,” which is not the meaning of this doctrine, hence the alternate, better name of unity. The Bible speaks of God as one Being, but having multiple attributes all being equal to each other. Therefore, we should not think of God as various attributes added together as in Figure 1. Rather, we should think of God’s whole being including every attribute: he is entirely loving, entirely merciful, entirely just, etc. Every attribute of God we find in Scripture is true of His entire or whole Being (Figure 2). So, why does the Scripture break up this thatch-work of God into single attributes? Probably because we can only handle one at a time! We need to see God in phases, but never apart from the full picture of His total character. 

Figure 2

Blogging for His glory, Adam Setser

How George Muller Started His Day

This is a quote from the autobiography of George Muller (1805-1898) who is renowned for starting orphanages in England and for joyfully depending upon God for all his needs. This quote tells us some about his faith and his discovery of true joy.

While I was staying in Nailsworth, it pleased the Lord to teach me a truth, irrespective of human instrumentality, as far as I know, the benefit of which I have not last, though now. . . more than forty years have passed away.

The point is this: I saw more clearly than ever that the first great and primary business to which I ought to attend every day was, to have my soul happy in the Lord. The first thing to be concerned about was not, how much I might serve the Lord, how I might glorify the Lord; but how I might get my soul into a happy state, and how muy inner man might be nourished. For I might seek to set the truth before the unconverted, I might seek to benefit believers, I might seek to relieve the distressed, I might in other ways seek to behave myself as it becomes a child of God in this world; and yet, not being happy in the Lord, and not being nourished and strengthened in my inner man day by day, all this might not be attended to in a right spirit. 

Before this time my practice had been, at least for ten years previously, as an habitual thing, to give myself to prayer, after having dressed in the morning. Now I saw, that the most important thing I had to do was to give myself to the reading of the Word of God and to meditate on it, that thus my heart might be comforted, encouraged, warned, reproved, instructed; and that thus, whilst meditating, my heart might be brought into experimental, communion with the Lord. I began therefore, to meditate on the New Testament, from the beginning, early in the morning.

The first thing I did, after having asked in a few words the Lord's blessing upon His precious Word, was to begin to meditate on the Word of God; searching, as it were, into every verse, to get blessing out of it; not for the sake of the public ministry of the Word; not for the sake of preaching on what I had meditated upon; but for the sake of obtaining food for my soul. The result I have found to be almost invariably is this, that after a very few minutes my soul has been led to confession, or to thanksgiving, or to intercession, or to supplication; so that though I did not, as it were, give myself to prayer, but to meditation, yet it turned almost immediately more or less into prayer. 

When thus I have been for a while making confession, or intercession, or supplication, or have given thanks, I go on to the next words or verse, turning all, as I go on, into prayer for myself or others, as the Word may lead to it; but still continually keeping before me, that food for my own soul is the object of my meditation. The result of this is, that there is always a good deal of confession, thanksgiving, supplication, or intercession mingled with my meditation, and that my inner man almost invariably is even sensibly nourished and strengthened and that by breakfast time, with rare exceptions, I am in a peaceful if not happy state of heart. Thus also the Lord is pleased to communicate unto me that which, very soon after, I have found to become food for other believers, though it was not for the sake of the public ministry of the Word that I gave myself to meditation, but for the profit of my own inner man.

The difference between my former practice and my present one is this. Formerly, when I rose, I began to pray as soon as possible, and generally spent all my time till breakfast in prayer, or almost all the time. At all events I almost invariably began with prayer. . . But what was the result? I often spent a quarter of an hour, or half an hour, or even an hour on my knees before being conscious to myself of having derived comfort, encouragement, humbling of soul, etc; and often after having suffered much from wandering of mind for the first ten minutes, or a quarter of an hour, or even half an hour, I only then really began to pray.

I scarcely ever suffer now in this way. For my heart being nourished by the truth, being brought into experimental fellowship with God, I speak to my Father and to my Friend (vile though I am, and unworthy of it!) about the things that He has brought before me in His precious Word.

It is often now astonished me that I did not sooner see this. In no book did I ever read about it. No public ministry ever brought the matter before me. No private intercourse with a brother stirred me up to this matter. And yet now, since God has taught me this point, it is as plain to me as anything, that the first thing the child of God has to do morning by morning is to obtain food for his inner man.

As the outward man is not fit for work for any length of time, except we take food, and as this is one of the first things we do in the morning, so it should be with the inner man. We should take food for that, as every one must allow. Now what is the food for the inner man: not prayer, but the Word of God: and here again not the simple reading of the Word of God, so that it only passes through our minds, just as water runs through a pipe, but considering what we read, pondering over it, and applying it to our hears.. . . 

I dwell so particularly on this point because of the immense spiritual profit and refreshment I am conscious of having derived from it myself, and I affectionately and solemnly beseech all my fellow believers to ponder this matter. By the blessing of God I ascribe to this mode the help and strength which I have had from Go to pass in peace through deeper trials in various ways than I had ever had before; and after having now above forty years tried this way, I can most fully, in the fear of God, commend it. How different when the soul is refreshed and made happy early in the morning, from what is when, without spiritual preparation, the service, the trials and the temptations of the day come upon one! 

 

I too have noticed this and attempted to share this, but never could present it this clearly and definitively. Thank God for His powerful, sufficient, inherent, and immutable Word!

Blogging for His glory, Adam Setser

I. Theology Proper- 2. The Knowledge of God

I. Theology Proper

2. The knowledge of God

It is a clear doctrine of Scripture that God can be known. This knowledge of God is given to us by God through revelations of himself, in general revelation (nature) and specific or special revelation (His Word). This knowledge of God, is however, limited so that mankind can not, and never will be able to fully comprehend God and His nature. Many ancient philosophers taught that God can be fully known just like any other object of knowledge. However, for one to consciously conceive with the imagination an object of infinite detail and depth, one must first have objects with which a comparison can be made. This is the downfall for this intuitive reasoning. Man has nothing that can compare with their Creator, and Sustainer. 

Older theologians believed that man can know God by the way of negation, by the way of eminence, and by the way of causality. In other words, we deny God any limitation, we ascribe to Him every excellence in the highest degree, and we attribute to Him the highest cause for every attribute manifested through His works. In learning of God, supernatural revelation paired with God’s intervention is necessary. Thus, God cannot be fully understood, but He can be truly known.

Necessity for God to reveal Himself-

If we are to understand and know God at all, it is necessary that He give us this knowledge. Paul says that what can be known about God is plain to people “because God hath shown it to them” (Rom 1:19). The knowledge of God revealed a more personal way, unto salvation, comes from God the Son: (Matt 11:27). This knowledge is not found through human effort: (1 Cor 1:21; 1 Cor 2:14; 2 Cor 4:3-4; John 1:18). Therefore, scripture is needed to teach man of God’s character. John Calvin eloquently writes on this need for Scripture in allowing man to know God.

Since God, in order to bring the whole human race under the same condemnation, holds forth to all, without exception, a mirror of His Deity in His works, another and better help must be given to guide us properly to God as a Creator.. . .For as the aged, or those whose sight is defective, when any book, however fair, is set before them, though they perceive that there is something written are scarcely able to make out consecutive words, but, when aided by glasses, begin to read distinctly, so Scripture, gathering together the impressions of Deity, which, till then, lay confused in our minds, dissipates the darkness, and shows us the true God clearly.

Thus, the Bible tells us how to understand the testimony about God found in nature. We therefore rely on God’s active communication to us in Scripture for the true knowledge of God.

We can truly know Him-

The Scripture plainly tells us many things about God’s character and attributes which lead us to a knowledge of Him so true that therefore know God. We know that He is love (1 John 4:8), light (1 John 1:5), spirit (John 4:24), just and righteous (Rom 3:26), etc. To say that we know this is not saying that we know all about God’s love, light, etc, but that we know of Him through those attributes. We also can know some of God’s thoughts from Scripture, and like David, when we know them, find them to be “precious” (Ps 139:17). Some people say that we can only know facts of God, but not Him. But Scripture does not speak that way. (Jer 9:23-24): “understands and knows me.” Jesus said (John 17:3): That they know you. . .”  The Son of God has come and given us greater understanding of who God is. (1 John 5:20; Gal 4:9; Phil 3:10; 1 John 2:3; 1 John 4:8). Also, John can say that “I can write to you because you know the Father” (1 John 2:13).

We will never fully know Him-

The modern German philosophers believe that all science, all true philosophy, must be founded on the knowledge of being, and not of phenomena. They reject the authority of the senses and of consciousness, and teach that it is only by the immediate cognition of the Absolute that we arrive at any true or certain knowledge. God, or rather, the Infinite, can be as thoroughly known and comprehended as the simplest object of sense or of consciousness; He is, only so far as He is known. It seems impossible that finite man could believe himself to be able to understand the infinite when he cannot even understand the finite in this temporal universe.

To say that one knows the infinite implies that he or she is  infinite. Only the infinite can comprehend the infinite. To say that one can understand God fully, then, implies that he or she believes themselves to be God. Also, the infinite, as one would therefore claim to be, cannot know. Infinite is Absolute. All knowledge is limitation and difference. It supposes a distinction between subject and object, between the knower and what is known, inconsistent with the idea of the Absolute. It therefore implies that the Absolute be conscious, but consciousness involves a distinction between self and not-self. It is knowledge of ourselves separate from what is not ourselves.

Therefore, from a philosophical approach, man cannot fully know God. From a Scriptural approach, we see that God is incomprehensible. (Ps 145:3; Ps 147:5; Ps 139:6). Paul implies this incomprehensibility in 1 Cor 2:10-12. At the end of Romans, after spending so much time studying God’s redemptive plan, Paul declares: (Rom 11:33). We can never fully understand God’s being, but also we can never fully understand each one of His attributes: his greatness (Ps 145:3), his understanding (Ps 147:5), his knowledge (Ps 139:6) etc, are ALL beyond our ability to fully understand. Other verses support this idea: (Isa 55:9; Job 26:14). 

This doctrine of Incomprehensibility is an encouragement to us as believers because we will never exhaust the study of God, and never run out of things to study and learn! Paul tells us we are to lead lives that “increase in the knowledge of God” (Col 1:10). We should grow in our knowledge of this infinite Being and Creator all our lives. The final thought is summed up by David as he learned more and more about God’s thoughts and His joy increased and increased: (Ps 139:17-18).