i don't not know nothing about god nohow

[Asteriktos]

Had a discussion with someone earlier about this. Is God ineffable? How can we say he's ineffable if he's really ineffable? Aren't we contradicting ourselves by even saying it? For that matter, isn't the entire word useless? Can God be unknowable, whether in general or according to some distinction like "in His essence"? Perhaps not fully understandable would be a better way of putting it? But then... what, if anything, is fully understandable? It seems to me that nothing could fall into this category... so again we are left with something having little to no use, except as an exaggerated statement that could be used to emphasize a point.

I expect that the tendency will be to say "it's a mystery" or "we just have to have faith". Perhaps. But can we try to go beyond that, at least for the sake of argument discussion?

[LBK]

The fullest revelation of God to us is in His Son, Jesus Christ. Yes, there is still much that is mysterious about Him, but the people of the NT period know much more about Him than did the people of the OT.

Really, A, this is Orthodoxy 101 stuff. 

[Asteriktos]

I don't understand how your post relates to mine

[LBK]

I don't understand how your post relates to mine

Is my post so difficult to understand? Oh my.

[Asteriktos]

No, not difficult to understand, just unrelated to the problem(s) that I mentioned... 

[LBK]

Then, perhaps you might need to express more clearly just what it is you want answered. I answered your OP based on what you wrote. 

[Asteriktos]

Is God ineffable?

[JamesR]

Our knowledge about God is limited to that which our minds are capable of comprehending, and going further, by how much of Himself He chooses to reveal to us. God's ultimate revelation to man is Jesus Christ; God becoming a part of the Creation, and thus, becoming susceptible to the laws of logic and what our feeble minds can fathom. It's the ultimate act of love; God subjecting Himself to empirical reasoning because He loved us.

[Cyrillic]

When one says that God is without limits is he defining God's limits?

[JamesR]

When one says that God is without limits is he defining God's limits?

[Melodist]

God is ultimately unknowable in His essence, but interacts with us and makes Himself known (to the capacity that we are able to know Him) through His energies. Also, all of creation proclaims the glory of God and, as LBK wrote, God makes himself known by revealing Himself in the person of His Son.

[Asteriktos]

Is God ineffable?

[Ashman618]

Is God ineffable?

God Himself is supra-ineffable
The human experiance of God would be to glorious and sacred to express in words, thus making it ineffable

[Asteriktos]

Is God ineffable?

God Himself is supra-ineffable
The human experiance of God would be to glorious and sacred to express in words, thus making it ineffable

Then why do we try to describe it? And how do we speak of God then? And how do we know anything about God? Or do we not know? Do we not think? Do we not believe?

[Ashman618]

Is God ineffable?

God Himself is supra-ineffable
The human experiance of God would be to glorious and sacred to express in words, thus making it ineffable

Then why do we try to describe it? And how do we speak of God then? And how do we know anything about God? Or do we not know? Do we not think? Do we not believe?

If I actually believed I would know, but I keep trying so hard to know I don't believe, I think? It's hard to describe when I speak about it.

[Asteriktos]

We know God is incomprehensible.

O rly?

 

[Ashman618]

Srsly 

[Father H]

Is God ineffable?

God Himself is supra-ineffable
The human experiance of God would be to glorious and sacred to express in words, thus making it ineffable

Correct.  Ashman points out hyper-apophatic theology.  There are three stages to theology
To say "God is the creator" is a cataphatic statement.  It is a statement kat'energeia (according to the energy).  We know this from the energies and the product of the energies (creation, etc.).  
To say "God is ineffable" is an apophatic statement, because it is stating that he is not definable (it is not stating what He is by energy, but what He is not).  Because not all of God is Energy, but beyond Energy is the incommunicable Essence, we therefore say "not-effable."  
However, because God is not constrained to the unconstrained, we, following the lead of St. Gregory Palamas, go to the hyper-cataphatic and hyper-apophatic, that He is super-essential, supra-ineffable, etc.  

[J Michael]

When one says that God is without limits is he defining God's limits?

This ^

 

[Jetavan]

But then... what, if anything, is fully understandable?

This is the question.

[Romaios]

The arena is in the heart. It is here that God must come, so that He and I can draw closer to each other, become acquainted, love each other, talk about things, and finally be united…the arena is here precisely because this is where the obstacles are: my ignorance and my heedlessness-the fact that I don’t ever remember God in my daily life. And even when I cried out and said, “My God, my God,” I really wasn’t calling upon God, but was interested only in myself. Interested in wanting to pray, because that’s what the Gospel says, or because that’s what my Elder told me, or because its something that I’m supposed to do, or because I had this need, or that desire. That was ignorance and heedlessness, and we still don’t know what those two things mean. My ignorance and heedlessness cast a shadow over God. I don’t remember Him, I don’t know Him. Why? Because He is hidden behind my passions. We’ve been separated! I’ve been locked out of Paradise, and can no longer eat from the Tree of Life, and unite myself to it, in order to regain life. “In that day that you eat of the Tree,” He says, “you will die” (Gen. 2:17.) And He shuts mankind out of Paradise. Why? For on the day we eat again of the Tree of Life, we shall be restored to Life. Paradise is still closed to us, because “the Kingdom of heaven is within us” (Luke 17:21.) That which is closed off is inside us. It’s closed off by the cherubim. What cherubim? The passions which keep my heart closed off from God. That’s what it means.

--Elder Emilianos of Simonopetra - Source

[Romaios]

If the Athenians of old had an altar dedicated “to the unknown God”, how much more have we. To tell the truth, for most people God is unknown, far beyond the clouds, in the dark. He’s a God that we don’t live, don’t feel, don’t know. That is precisely why our spiritual life is so difficult. That is why we cannot make it through our vigil, that is why we cannot stand firm in adoration. We don’t feel God, we don’t know him, we don’t love him, God doesn’t move us, he doesn’t mean anything for us. The prayer and vigil of most people, sometimes even of monks, is a thick darkness.    

Despite all this, the enlightenment of the soul and its unification with God, that is the indwelling of the personal God, happens in these hours [monastic vigils / personal prayer rule]. They are tough hours, because we are without God and yet are called to acquire (win) him. God exists anyway. We know that God is in our being, in the atmosphere, in the monastery, he is ‘everywhere present’. In all these, we live like ‘atheists in the world’, we are no different from the sinners, from the tax collectors, from the prostitutes or from the criminals. We may have ‘all justice’, but the point is: do I have the living God? Do I serve God? Do I see him? Do I understand him? Did God enlighten me? Not: what did he tell me in my dream – in the dream that I am making – ,  but what share has my existence in the life of God?      

Because, strictly speaking, we are lacking/missing God, we are compelled to understand that our prayer will be an ascesis, a struggle. Just as we put the grill on the coals and place the meat on it, in order to fry it, and we see blood coming out of it and smell its aroma, so also our canon (prayer rule) is the grill on which we are fried dry: it is our self-sacrifice, our painful ascetic effort, the surrender of our nights, of our flat (superficial) life, of our sin, of our holy longing for God. We put everything there, and so we become a sacrifice for Christ. If, however, I don’t live God, at least I’ll be sacrificed for this God and I’ll stand like that before him. God sees this sacrifice, that I am becoming a martyr/witness before him. “Bring forth my martyrs/witnesses” says the Lord. This way, I also become a martyr, which the Church offers up on the grill: in that concrete cell in my darkness, in my bitterness, in my invisibility, in my incomprehension, in my ignorance, I am sacrificed for God.          

--Elder Emilianos of Simonopetra - Source

That last sentence is something the Elder is actually living: I've heard he has Alzheimer.  

http://elderaimilianos.blogspot.ro/

[yeshuaisiam]

How can we comprehend that which is infinite?

How can we comprehend anything.... The old paradox - If you shoot an arrow to a target and it sticks, we agree it has to get halfway first.   In order to get halfway, it must get to halfway to halfway first.   In order to get to halfway of halfway, it must get halfway to halfway to halfway first.... And so on.

By our logic, the arrow should never hit the target.

I believe God being infinite, can't be fully understood.  God creates a paradox to us that we can't logically understand.

[Nephi]

Is God ineffable?

God Himself is supra-ineffable
The human experiance of God would be to glorious and sacred to express in words, thus making it ineffable

Correct.  Ashman points out hyper-apophatic theology.  There are three stages to theology
To say "God is the creator" is a cataphatic statement.  It is a statement kat'energeia (according to the energy).  We know this from the energies and the product of the energies (creation, etc.).  
To say "God is ineffable" is an apophatic statement, because it is stating that he is not definable (it is not stating what He is by energy, but what He is not).  Because not all of God is Energy, but beyond Energy is the incommunicable Essence, we therefore say "not-effable."  
However, because God is not constrained to the unconstrained, we, following the lead of St. Gregory Palamas, go to the hyper-cataphatic and hyper-apophatic, that He is super-essential, supra-ineffable, etc.  

Interesting.

[Father H]

How can we comprehend that which is infinite?

How can we comprehend anything.... The old paradox - If you shoot an arrow to a target and it sticks, we agree it has to get halfway first.   In order to get halfway, it must get to halfway to halfway first.   In order to get to halfway of halfway, it must get halfway to halfway to halfway first.... And so on.

By our logic, the arrow should never hit the target.

I believe God being infinite, can't be fully understood.  God creates a paradox to us that we can't logically understand.

I was with you until "by our logic, the arrow should never hit the target."   Not true.  While the target-hitting itself is a mystery, we can look at it in reverse--the target is halfway to the quarter mark, halfway to the halfway mark (i.e. at the quarter mark), etc.  Logically it has the chance of hitting the target, and we have described its trajectory.  However, if the target is infinitely far away, and yet is present everywhere along the way as well, then the correct trajectory will both hit the target multiple times and never hit the target, both being true.  Now that is a true paradox.      

[yeshuaisiam]

How can we comprehend that which is infinite?

How can we comprehend anything.... The old paradox - If you shoot an arrow to a target and it sticks, we agree it has to get halfway first.   In order to get halfway, it must get to halfway to halfway first.   In order to get to halfway of halfway, it must get halfway to halfway to halfway first.... And so on.

By our logic, the arrow should never hit the target.

I believe God being infinite, can't be fully understood.  God creates a paradox to us that we can't logically understand.

I was with you until "by our logic, the arrow should never hit the target."   Not true.  While the target-hitting itself is a mystery, we can look at it in reverse--the target is halfway to the quarter mark, halfway to the halfway mark (i.e. at the quarter mark), etc.  Logically it has the chance of hitting the target, and we have described its trajectory.  However, if the target is infinitely far away, and yet is present everywhere along the way as well, then the correct trajectory will both hit the target multiple times and never hit the target, both being true.  Now that is a true paradox.      

Well, the target halfway to the arrow, halfway again, halfway again, halfway again, still would never get to the arrow, and the distance still infinite.

Everything is lost in that infinite.

1 can't get to 2
1 to 2 must first pass halfway
1.5
1.25  halfway to that first
1.125 halfway to that first
etc.

2 can't get to 1
2 to 1 must first pass halfway
1.5
1.75 halfway to this first
1.825 halfway to this first
etc.

Somehow the arrow still makes it to the target.   The infinite boggles our mind, boggles our logic, and boggles our understanding.  We can't logically understand the infinite.   All things exist in this infinite, yet we can't understand it.

[Father H]

How can we comprehend that which is infinite?

How can we comprehend anything.... The old paradox - If you shoot an arrow to a target and it sticks, we agree it has to get halfway first.   In order to get halfway, it must get to halfway to halfway first.   In order to get to halfway of halfway, it must get halfway to halfway to halfway first.... And so on.

By our logic, the arrow should never hit the target.

I believe God being infinite, can't be fully understood.  God creates a paradox to us that we can't logically understand.

I was with you until "by our logic, the arrow should never hit the target."   Not true.  While the target-hitting itself is a mystery, we can look at it in reverse--the target is halfway to the quarter mark, halfway to the halfway mark (i.e. at the quarter mark), etc.  Logically it has the chance of hitting the target, and we have described its trajectory.  However, if the target is infinitely far away, and yet is present everywhere along the way as well, then the correct trajectory will both hit the target multiple times and never hit the target, both being true.  Now that is a true paradox.      

Well, the target halfway to the arrow, halfway again, halfway again, halfway again, still would never get to the arrow, and the distance still infinite.

Everything is lost in that infinite.

1 can't get to 2
1 to 2 must first pass halfway
1.5
1.25  halfway to that first
1.125 halfway to that first
etc.

2 can't get to 1
2 to 1 must first pass halfway
1.5
1.75 halfway to this first
1.825 halfway to this first
etc.

Somehow the arrow still makes it to the target.   The infinite boggles our mind, boggles our logic, and boggles our understanding.  We can't logically understand the infinite.   All things exist in this infinite, yet we can't understand it.

Right.  Did you actually read my whole post, in which my point was that the Lord is both the inn and the way to the inn?  and thus hits the Target (being on the Way who is already the target), and never hits the Target as it is infinite?  My point was that you can only see it this way going toward it.  Please see bolded above.     

[yeshuaisiam]

How can we comprehend that which is infinite?

How can we comprehend anything.... The old paradox - If you shoot an arrow to a target and it sticks, we agree it has to get halfway first.   In order to get halfway, it must get to halfway to halfway first.   In order to get to halfway of halfway, it must get halfway to halfway to halfway first.... And so on.

By our logic, the arrow should never hit the target.

I believe God being infinite, can't be fully understood.  God creates a paradox to us that we can't logically understand.

I was with you until "by our logic, the arrow should never hit the target."   Not true.  While the target-hitting itself is a mystery, we can look at it in reverse--the target is halfway to the quarter mark, halfway to the halfway mark (i.e. at the quarter mark), etc.  Logically it has the chance of hitting the target, and we have described its trajectory.  However, if the target is infinitely far away, and yet is present everywhere along the way as well, then the correct trajectory will both hit the target multiple times and never hit the target, both being true.  Now that is a true paradox.      

Well, the target halfway to the arrow, halfway again, halfway again, halfway again, still would never get to the arrow, and the distance still infinite.

Everything is lost in that infinite.

1 can't get to 2
1 to 2 must first pass halfway
1.5
1.25  halfway to that first
1.125 halfway to that first
etc.

2 can't get to 1
2 to 1 must first pass halfway
1.5
1.75 halfway to this first
1.825 halfway to this first
etc.

Somehow the arrow still makes it to the target.   The infinite boggles our mind, boggles our logic, and boggles our understanding.  We can't logically understand the infinite.   All things exist in this infinite, yet we can't understand it.

Right.  Did you actually read my whole post, in which my point was that the Lord is both the inn and the way to the inn?  and thus hits the Target (being on the Way who is already the target), and never hits the Target as it is infinite?  My point was that you can only see it this way going toward it.  Please see bolded above.     

Yes!  I agree with you!

It's mind blowing and beautiful all at the same time. 

[TheMathematician]

How can we comprehend that which is infinite?

How can we comprehend anything.... The old paradox - If you shoot an arrow to a target and it sticks, we agree it has to get halfway first.   In order to get halfway, it must get to halfway to halfway first.   In order to get to halfway of halfway, it must get halfway to halfway to halfway first.... And so on.

By our logic, the arrow should never hit the target.

I believe God being infinite, can't be fully understood.  God creates a paradox to us that we can't logically understand.

I was with you until "by our logic, the arrow should never hit the target."   Not true.  While the target-hitting itself is a mystery, we can look at it in reverse--the target is halfway to the quarter mark, halfway to the halfway mark (i.e. at the quarter mark), etc.  Logically it has the chance of hitting the target, and we have described its trajectory.  However, if the target is infinitely far away, and yet is present everywhere along the way as well, then the correct trajectory will both hit the target multiple times and never hit the target, both being true.  Now that is a true paradox.      

Well, the target halfway to the arrow, halfway again, halfway again, halfway again, still would never get to the arrow, and the distance still infinite.

Everything is lost in that infinite.

1 can't get to 2
1 to 2 must first pass halfway
1.5
1.25  halfway to that first
1.125 halfway to that first
etc.

2 can't get to 1
2 to 1 must first pass halfway
1.5
1.75 halfway to this first
1.825 halfway to this first
etc.

Somehow the arrow still makes it to the target.   The infinite boggles our mind, boggles our logic, and boggles our understanding.  We can't logically understand the infinite.   All things exist in this infinite, yet we can't understand it.

but the thing is, the target is not the halfway point for the flight of the arrow, which is how it makes sense for the arrow to get to the target.

Ie, the arrow will travel 100 metres before it hits the ground, and the target is at 80 metres. half of 100 is 50, half of 50 is 25(so 75 metres traveled), and half of 25 is 12.5, which makes 87.25, which means the arrow will have hit the target at 80 metres.

and to expand(i think) with Father, if you take out the constraints of gravity and resistance, then the path of the arrow is infinite, and if the target is also at infinity, then we will never hit the target. but at the same time, we keep seeing the target being reached, but yet we keep going and seeing the target again and again, so that we keep hitting the target on the way to the target, but yet never reach the target.

[biro]

If the target does not move, and the arrow does, eventually they will have to meet. Unless a giant wind comes up, or there's a bird, or lightning, or magic elves... 

[Father H]

If the target does not move, and the arrow does, eventually they will have to meet. Unless a giant wind comes up, or there's a bird, or lightning, or magic elves... 

Correct.  But Mathematically describing its trajectory by fractions indicates that it will hit the target but never describes its actual hitting of the target.  See Mathmetician and Yeshuaism's posts above.  This indicates the infinite within the finite (or infinitesimal, but same principle).   However, if the target itself is infinite, and everywhere present along the trajectory, it has no end.  One cannot reach the "end-target" (or end of the target) even when one has reached the target because it has no end.   

[biro]

Wow. 

[Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)]

I have a question: Is saying "God is ineffable" a way of defining Him? If so, the answer to the OP would be: no, God is not ineffable?

[Jason.Wike]

NVM.

[minasoliman]

Had a discussion with someone earlier about this. Is God ineffable? How can we say he's ineffable if he's really ineffable? Aren't we contradicting ourselves by even saying it? For that matter, isn't the entire word useless? Can God be unknowable, whether in general or according to some distinction like "in His essence"? Perhaps not fully understandable would be a better way of putting it? But then... what, if anything, is fully understandable? It seems to me that nothing could fall into this category... so again we are left with something having little to no use, except as an exaggerated statement that could be used to emphasize a point.

I expect that the tendency will be to say "it's a mystery" or "we just have to have faith". Perhaps. But can we try to go beyond that, at least for the sake of argument discussion?

So you're saying that if God is ineffable, we should have never known Him to begin with?

He is everything.  He is both knowable and unknowable, infinite and imminent, powerful and gentle, fire and wind.  Creator out of all things non-existent, yet all things exist eternally in His thought.  That's why He's not merely ineffable, He is a paradox, but truth, a mystery that relies on relationship.  And while He made an effort to make Himself known through prophets, through nature, through miracles, He finally manifested Himself fully in Christ, that we may be filled with all the fullness of God (Ephesians 3:19).

[orthonorm]

How can we comprehend that which is infinite?

How can we comprehend anything.... The old paradox - If you shoot an arrow to a target and it sticks, we agree it has to get halfway first.   In order to get halfway, it must get to halfway to halfway first.   In order to get to halfway of halfway, it must get halfway to halfway to halfway first.... And so on.

By our logic, the arrow should never hit the target.

I believe God being infinite, can't be fully understood.  God creates a paradox to us that we can't logically understand.

I understand infinity and calculus.

This is what happens when you are not home schooled.

[orthonorm]

This thread is about as deep as the bag my fortune cookies are lying in.

[yeshuaisiam]

How can we comprehend that which is infinite?

How can we comprehend anything.... The old paradox - If you shoot an arrow to a target and it sticks, we agree it has to get halfway first.   In order to get halfway, it must get to halfway to halfway first.   In order to get to halfway of halfway, it must get halfway to halfway to halfway first.... And so on.

By our logic, the arrow should never hit the target.

I believe God being infinite, can't be fully understood.  God creates a paradox to us that we can't logically understand.

I understand infinity and calculus.

This is what happens when you are not home schooled.

Nice cheap shot on home school (especially considering my wife and I home school).  I can only conclude by this, that you have absolutely NO idea or even a general concept of what homeschooling is.   See there's this thing my family belongs to...  It's called a "home school group".   There are many families in the group. There are many of the older children in these families attending SMU, UTD, and community colleges.  The funny report back is "They already learned the stuff they are teaching in college".  Calculus... Blah, try discrete structures, which astonished me as this course is (with actual college books) being learned by a 16 year old in the group.  (Under Computer Science Theory)

So if you understand infinity, you understand a lot more than me.   I for one can't comprehend that which is infinite, eternal, or forever.     I understand the concept, but can't define it.  I guess you understand the infinite/eternal, which is God.   Even the EO faith calls God infinite in prayer.

If your education was a public education, it would serve as ironic they can speak of infinity with absolutes (non-real number, like zero) yet void out God in their schools.

[JamesR]

Being brutally honest, I've experienced all types of schooling due to moving a lot growing up. I've been home-schooled at times, went to public school at other times, private school once, online etc. And the one thing I've noticed is that I really didn't learn jack from either type of schooling. I've learned more simply from my own reading, watching Discovery channel, just living and listening to the drunken rants of my grandparents than I ever have from schooling.

[yeshuaisiam]

Being brutally honest, I've experienced all types of schooling due to moving a lot growing up. I've been home-schooled at times, went to public school at other times, private school once, online etc. And the one thing I've noticed is that I really didn't learn jack from either type of schooling. I've learned more simply from my own reading, watching Discovery channel, just living and listening to the drunken rants of my grandparents than I ever have from schooling.

Drunken rants can reveal a lot of great information, and will educate you very well.  I agree completely.

[NightOwl]

Being brutally honest, I've experienced all types of schooling due to moving a lot growing up. I've been home-schooled at times, went to public school at other times, private school once, online etc. And the one thing I've noticed is that I really didn't learn jack from either type of schooling. I've learned more simply from my own reading, watching Discovery channel, just living and listening to the drunken rants of my grandparents than I ever have from schooling.

"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education."- Mark Twain

[WPM]

Had a discussion with someone earlier about this. Is God ineffable? How can we say he's ineffable if he's really ineffable? Aren't we contradicting ourselves by even saying it? For that matter, isn't the entire word useless? Can God be unknowable, whether in general or according to some distinction like "in His essence"? Perhaps not fully understandable would be a better way of putting it? But then... what, if anything, is fully understandable? It seems to me that nothing could fall into this category... so again we are left with something having little to no use, except as an exaggerated statement that could be used to emphasize a point.

I expect that the tendency will be to say "it's a mystery" or "we just have to have faith". Perhaps. But can we try to go beyond that, at least for the sake of argument discussion?

Learn what it says in the New Testament Bible. God's Word

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Free-For-All > Religious Topics (Moderator: minasoliman) > Topic: i don't not know nothing about god nohow