Sproul (cited above):
>What can we know about God? That’s the most basic question of theology, for what we can know about God and whether we can know anything about Him at all determine the scope and content of our study. Here we must consider the teaching of the greatest theologians in history, all of whom have affirmed the “incomprehensibility of God.” By using the term incomprehensible, they are not referring to something we are unable to comprehend or know at all. Theologically speaking, to say God is incomprehensible is not to say that God is utterly unknowable. It is to say that none of us can comprehend God exhaustively.
>Incomprehensibility is related to a key tenet of the Protestant Reformation—the finite cannot contain (or grasp) the infinite. Human beings are finite creatures, so our minds always work from a finite perspective. We live, move, and have our being on a finite plane, but God lives, moves, and has His being in infinity. Our finite understanding cannot contain an infinite subject; thus, God is incomprehensible. This concept represents a check and balance to warn us lest we think we have captured altogether and mastered in every detail the things of God. Our finitude always limits our understanding of God.
That last sentence simply restates what I wrote above: all knowledge is conditioned by its 'knower.' (Side note, I'd never encountered that Sproul article until this morning, so it was a wonderful find.)
Surely you must realize that something immense (without walls, borders, boundaries, edges, or limits), cannot be fully contained by something that does have walls, borders, boundaries, edges, and limits)? Read the links I've sent--this isn't unique to Van Til--it's standard Protestant Reformed theology.
The finite cannot contain the infinite: to think that it can "...is entirely out of the question."
"Our God is unsearchable; he ways past finding out." This is what infinity means. "So we can't know God at all?" Non sequitur!
Please, read the three links I've sent. You may end up rejecting the Protestant Reformed teaching of divine incomprehensibility, which you are obviously free to do, but at least you will understand better exactly what you're rejecting.
freeborn | ἐλεύθερος
npub1ak…r0gwg
2024-03-01 13:39:33
in reply to nevent1q…rg9f
Author Public Key
npub1ak5kewf6anwkrt0qc8ua907ljkn7wm83e2ycyrpcumjvaf2upszs8r0gwgPublished at
2024-03-01 13:39:33Event JSON
{
"id": "1e5b76d2c770013c81fe2d86d962ee79cb0cce44e891c797d356d94b6ad2b316",
"pubkey": "eda96cb93aecdd61ade0c1f9d2bfdf95a7e76cf1ca89820c38e6e4cea55c0c05",
"created_at": 1709300373,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"p",
"8f51dad4266e6616cb461a8c922977dbdb041b1857260f7592ac72ae1b40587f",
"",
""
],
[
"p",
"1a65d3a81c5d553d922635dfff929ab3ea30e50a10ee2c5c7de67d7de6c6de76",
"wss://no.str.cr/",
"History \u0026 Wisdom"
],
[
"p",
"854043ae8f1f97430ca8c1f1a090bdde6488bd5115c7a45307a2a212750ae4cb",
"wss://no.str.cr/",
"Prophets \u0026 Epistles"
],
[
"e",
"3ffa391b2ce236cd9d8ba689de6f3a7efebf76acde437b638ee93390f46bcc8c",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"7c3bc327a33e60f93a876046ce8837616c3b4757435db05819801a2ef1085e4e",
"",
"mention"
],
[
"e",
"c51977a3592497c39876ad09d928dbd813a3c41eb9dacfe32ddcd38f5b8a8d70",
"wss://relay.damus.io/",
"mention"
],
[
"e",
"66937f86036bf16345aa75d5bf5bd523ab53c39b4a37d41c6da28c71e886d235",
"wss://relay.damus.io/",
"reply"
]
],
"content": "Sproul (cited above):\n\u003eWhat can we know about God? That’s the most basic question of theology, for what we can know about God and whether we can know anything about Him at all determine the scope and content of our study. Here we must consider the teaching of the greatest theologians in history, all of whom have affirmed the “incomprehensibility of God.” By using the term incomprehensible, they are not referring to something we are unable to comprehend or know at all. Theologically speaking, to say God is incomprehensible is not to say that God is utterly unknowable. It is to say that none of us can comprehend God exhaustively.\n\u003eIncomprehensibility is related to a key tenet of the Protestant Reformation—the finite cannot contain (or grasp) the infinite. Human beings are finite creatures, so our minds always work from a finite perspective. We live, move, and have our being on a finite plane, but God lives, moves, and has His being in infinity. Our finite understanding cannot contain an infinite subject; thus, God is incomprehensible. This concept represents a check and balance to warn us lest we think we have captured altogether and mastered in every detail the things of God. Our finitude always limits our understanding of God. \n\nThat last sentence simply restates what I wrote above: all knowledge is conditioned by its 'knower.' (Side note, I'd never encountered that Sproul article until this morning, so it was a wonderful find.)\n\nSurely you must realize that something immense (without walls, borders, boundaries, edges, or limits), cannot be fully contained by something that does have walls, borders, boundaries, edges, and limits)? Read the links I've sent--this isn't unique to Van Til--it's standard Protestant Reformed theology.\n\nThe finite cannot contain the infinite: to think that it can \"...is entirely out of the question.\"\n\n\"Our God is unsearchable; he ways past finding out.\" This is what infinity means. \"So we can't know God at all?\" Non sequitur!\n\nPlease, read the three links I've sent. You may end up rejecting the Protestant Reformed teaching of divine incomprehensibility, which you are obviously free to do, but at least you will understand better exactly what you're rejecting.",
"sig": "bf570bad4e2587e4c4b167fc817d014c628f846289e878ab405a049b4ddd1ceb09cfbbecb4b75cd5e9a49afb6e775de8d6d011a0a8d13258335e38c6228fdf7e"
}