Juxtaposing God's Transcendence With His Simplicity

[makesends]

Now jux suppose (Ha! see what I did there?) that we could understand all there is to know about God, and that he can be aptly and sufficiently described in words we can put together, what could we possibly mean by the words we would use? We would have no recourse but to use the words God uses to describe himself, but what would WE mean by them?

We've got a real problem! Here we are, driven, and even required by God, to talk about him—we actually can't help it—but when we do, there's no way to do justice to the subject. So we try to be as accurate and as complete as possible. One way we do that is to analyze and categorize and name the categories with as concise a word as we can find. We come up with what we call attributes, hopefully attributes that are found in Scripture, or at least from good solid reasoning, if not both.

Here we run into two attributes that on the surface appear to be in conflict. I hope to show why they are not, and maybe give some notion as to why they actually support each other. One thing we do know —that if they are truly attributes of God, they are both in him infinitely and without conflict.

The 'Transcendence of God' is necessarily a term from the Human point-of-view. God himself just is —he needn't think of himself as transcendent. It is a comparative word, comparing him with, at most, his creation, and at least, what little comprehension we partially sentient creatures are capable of. The "Simplicity of God" is quite a bit different. It is our attempt to say about what our intellects tend to shrug off, (ironically for its incomprehensibility compared to the 'Transcendence' that we think we understand and freely accept—it would probably be best for me to not question why we do that!)

God's Transcendence, we think of as the fact that in every way, he is beyond our comprehension. Well, his Simplicity is beyond our comprehension, too! According to Wikipedia, "in classical theistic and monotheistic theology, the doctrine of divine simplicity says that God is simple (without parts). God exists as one unified entity, with no distinct attributes; God's existence is identical to God's essence." Got that?

Both of those (Transcendence and Simplicity) are one-and-the-same God. More complicated than we can handle and simpler than we can understand.

Help me out here! God is no mere resident of reality, but the very cause of it. And we pretend to fit him into our minds.

 

[Josheb]

Now jux suppose (Ha! see what I did there?)

I do see what you did there and it brought a chuckle to my heart and a smile to my face. Clever.

 

[Josheb]

Now jux suppose (Ha! see what I did there?) that we could understand all there is to know about God, and that he can be aptly and sufficiently described in words we can put together....

The simple attempt to apply that supposition hurts my head. My brain now hurts and I really, really, hope you didn't break it worse than it was already broke . Imagogetsomecoffee

 

[Josheb]

We would have no recourse but to use the words God uses to describe himself, but what would WE mean by them?

If that is intended to say it should be incumbent upon us to first understand what is said in scripture as the original author intended, then that is 100% correct! Exegetically speaking, that precept is usually applied to ask, "What did Moses mean?" or "What did Matthew mean?" or "What did John mean?" but the larger truth is that God spoke through all of the scripture's writers, and we should be asking, "What did God mean?" When we then use God's word.... do we mean what God meant? (given the fact God's revelation is always partial because He is infinite, and we are finite).

It's a very risky thing to presume to speak for God.

We've got a real problem!

Yep.

But we can take some comfort and encouragement in the knowledge God revealed His revelation about Himself with an inherent purpose that everything He said was/is to be understood.

Here we are, driven, and even required by God, to talk about him—we actually can't help it—but when we do, there's no way to do justice to the subject. So we try to be as accurate and as complete as possible. One way we do that is to analyze and categorize and name the categories with as concise a word as we can find. We come up with what we call attributes, hopefully attributes that are found in Scripture, or at least from good solid reasoning, if not both.

I do not mean to split hairs unnecessarily but, technically, it is scripture that speaks of God's "attributes" or "qualities" (see Rom. 1:20). If we "come up with" attributes that aren't attributes cited by God in His revelation of Himself then we, at best, risk error and, at worst, create the antithesis of the God who is truthful and the truth of His word(s).

Here we run into two attributes that on the surface appear to be in conflict. I hope to show why they are not, and maybe give some notion as to why they actually support each other. One thing we do know —that if they are truly attributes of God, they are both in him infinitely and without conflict.

The 'Transcendence of God' is necessarily a term from the Human point-of-view. God himself just is — he needn't think of himself as transcendent. It is a comparative word, comparing him with, at most, his creation, and at least, what little comprehension we partially sentient creatures are capable of. The "Simplicity of God" is quite a bit different. It is our attempt to say about what our intellects tend to shrug off, (ironically for its incomprehensibility compared to the 'Transcendence' that we think we understand and freely accept—it would probably be best for me to not question why we do that!)

God's Transcendence, we think of as the fact that in every way, he is beyond our comprehension. Well, his Simplicity is beyond our comprehension, too! According to Wikipedia, "in classical theistic and monotheistic theology, the doctrine of divine simplicity says that God is simple (without parts). God exists as one unified entity, with no distinct attributes; God's existence is identical to God's essence." Got that?

Both of those (Transcendence and Simplicity) are one-and-the-same God. More complicated than we can handle and simpler than we can understand.

Help me out here!

Hmmmm.....

God exists external to all that He has created, yes? This is a logical necessity of Genesis 1:1.
God can and does enter into that which He created chronically. Yes? This is the logical necessity of the entirety of whole scripture in which we read God interacting with His creation in a variety of ways (all of which are sovereign, almighty, and personal).
The fact that God exists external to creation is a simple fact. Let me clarify that: I mean it is a simple fact, not simply a fact. In fact, God's external existence is simply a simple fact of scripture. The same is true of His entrance into creation. That too is simply a simple fact.

I will suggest the above is one way to approach the transcendent simplicity of God, or the transcendence and simplicity of God.

I doubt God who IS sits around wondering if He's simple or complex .

God is no mere resident of reality, but the very cause of it. And we pretend to fit him into our minds.

Well.... I say God is reality. We don't understand reality, although we observe and experience it every nanosecond of existence. It was only relatively recently that we figured out there are ten or eleven dimensions to creation (and there might be more!).

People living on a two-dimensional plane observe and experience everything in two dimensions. When a three-dimensional sphere intersects that plane all they observe and experience of that intersection is a two-dimensional circle. They cannot see anything above or below the plane on/in which they exist. As the sphere passes through the plane they have the opportunity to observe and experience the sphere in its entirety but their ability to do so depends on their ability to fathom the totality of that experience (a progression of first enlarging circles followed by a series of diminishing circles that begin and end with a single point.

Both the plane and the sphere are simple.

Only the sphere is transcendent.

Now imagine that two-dimensional plane exists in a ten- or eleven-dimensional field and the sphere is extra-dimensional and able to completely surround the plane while also able to move about, intersecting the plane in every one of the 10 or 11 dimensions .




My regrets if any of that causes anyone else's brain to hurt .

 

[stthomaschurch]

God is simple enough a child can understand Him, complex enough the most skilled theologian is scratching the surface.

Truly God is unfathomable, His understanding is without end. We will never tire of worship and knowing Him more in heaven.

 

[makesends]

makesends said:
We would have no recourse but to use the words God uses to describe himself, but what would WE mean by them?

If that is intended to say it should be incumbent upon us to first understand what is said in scripture as the original author intended, then that is 100% correct! Exegetically speaking, that precept is usually applied to ask, "What did Moses mean?" or "What did Matthew mean?" or "What did John mean?" but the larger truth is that God spoke through all of the scripture's writers, and we should be asking, "What did God mean?" When we then use God's word.... do we mean what God meant? (given the fact God's revelation is always partial because He is infinite, and we are finite).

It's a very risky thing to presume to speak for God.

That's for sure! It's one of the reasons for depending on the mercy of God rather than the ability of man.

Yep.

But we can take some comfort and encouragement in the knowledge God revealed His revelation about Himself with an inherent purpose that everything He said was/is to be understood.

You may be right, but, to me, part of the reason that WE don't understand now all that we will "then", will have already been written in the Word of God, for us to see "then" and be amazed at God's wisdom. The simplicity of absolute Truth, within all its complicated descriptions; yes, it is to be understood, but none of us here may enjoy all its delights.

I do not mean to split hairs unnecessarily but, technically, it is scripture that speaks of God's "attributes" or "qualities" (see Rom. 1:20). If we "come up with" attributes that aren't attributes cited by God in His revelation of Himself then we, at best, risk error and, at worst, create the antithesis of the God who is truthful and the truth of His word(s).

Agreed. My point was that will-he nil-he we DO put our bias into everything we think, and sometimes it is pretty good logic that fits scripture, (though without authority until scripture). I think that you would agree, for example, with the Simplicity of God, which was probably not drawn from Scripture initially, but was a philosophically necessary descriptor that fits Scripture. It IS completely in keeping with the other "attributes", but I'd have to say that it is arrived at more intuitively or intellectually, than through Scriptural derivation. I think that I found it by means of what I knew of all the other things the Word says about the nature, character and person of God, and not through direct reference to 'Simplicity'.

Hmmmm.....

God exists external to all that He has created, yes? This is a logical necessity of Genesis 1:1.
God can and does enter into that which He created chronically. Yes? This is the logical necessity of the entirety of whole scripture in which we read God interacting with His creation in a variety of ways (all of which are sovereign, almighty, and personal).
The fact that God exists external to creation is a simple fact. Let me clarify that: I mean it is a simple fact, not simply a fact. In fact, God's external existence is simply a simple fact of scripture. The same is true of His entrance into creation. That too is simply a simple fact.

I will suggest the above is one way to approach the transcendent simplicity of God, or the transcendence and simplicity of God.

A good way, too. Thanks.

But the idea of him existing external to creation, while valid for human reasoning, is categorizing, compartmentalizing. To me, that subjecty begins to intersect with the Attribute of Immanence.

Man I love this stuff! God is so different, so immense!

I doubt God who IS sits around wondering if He's simple or complex .

Isn't THAT the truth! I keep finding myself having to explain to people that God doesn't have to consider options in order to decide, doesn't have to mitigate justice to be merciful, and ISN'T LIKE US.

Well.... I say God is reality. We don't understand reality, although we observe and experience it every nanosecond of existence.

That's a good way to put it.

It was only relatively recently that we figured out there are ten or eleven dimensions to creation (and there might be more!).

People living on a two-dimensional plane observe and experience everything in two dimensions. When a three-dimensional sphere intersects that plane all they observe and experience of that intersection is a two-dimensional circle. They cannot see anything above or below the plane on/in which they exist. As the sphere passes through the plane they have the opportunity to observe and experience the sphere in its entirety but their ability to do so depends on their ability to fathom the totality of that experience (a progression of first enlarging circles followed by a series of diminishing circles that begin and end with a single point.

Both the plane and the sphere are simple.

Only the sphere is transcendent.

Now imagine that two-dimensional plane exists in a ten- or eleven-dimensional field and the sphere is extra-dimensional and able to completely surround the plane while also able to move about, intersecting the plane in every one of the 10 or 11 dimensions .




My regrets if any of that causes anyone else's brain to hurt .

No apology needed. I consider that merely allegorical, descriptive merely of a way to arrange thought, or to get ready to try to understand the thoughts —maybe "a structure, a place to put the thoughts." God is way more transcendent than that, but it does a pretty fair job of explaining why we can't define him.

 

[Mr GLee]

I would think in once sense all the work of creating was finished in six days we can enter that eternal rest

Yoked with him we can rest in the labor of His love. That is if we hear his voice and do not harden ones new born again heart .

As a living abiding words id daily reveals his work in mysteries of faith (the unseen eternal things )Through Parables, hiding the understanding from the father of lies. The Legion is not subject to the gospel has no spiritual understanding . It is why he said if you are the Son of God.? And went after Peter as if the Son of man Jesus. Satan the faithless one no hope of the unseen eternal things of the Father in heaven

His kingdom is of this corrupted world as far as the eyes can see . . .the glory of dead things .

I would offer Satan as the king of lying signs to wonder, wonder, wonder, marvel after would deceive the world to treat signs and wonders the same as prophecy (sola scriptura) His source false prophecy oral traditons of dying mankind

Signs used as metaphors in parable (Prophecy) follow .

Mark 16:16-18King James Version He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.And these signs shall follow (the key to understanding) them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;(gospel) They shall take up serpents; (false apostles sent with false prophecy ) and if they drink any deadly thing,(false prophecy) it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.by (the power of the gospel) .

Signs and wonders false gospel on the rise

Sends out his true prophets out two by two .

The invisible made visible in that parable

Believers have prophecy till the end of time .The un-redeemed must seek after sign before they will believe ,

Just like the Pharisees that made Jesus into a circus seal . .work some magic perform a miracle then when we se we will believe for 1/2 a second

The pagan foundation "out of sight out of mind" . No new signs were given

God still revealing his "let there be" and "it was God alone good"

Follow after Jesus who follows the powerful Father . No following after a sign gifts. In that way parables lead .

 

[CrowCross]

Isaiah said.....55:9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.