@TheologyNerd, nice insight
At the pinnacle of Christian theology, the Incarnation is the fulcrum where the unknowable God becomes knowable, not as a dissolution of mystery but as its transfiguration. Your appeal to John 1:18
“No one has ever seen God; the only begotten God..He has made Him known”
establishes Christ as the exegesis of the Father, the visible revelation of the invisible. Hebrews 1:3’s “exact imprint” and “radiance of God’s glory” further affirm that Christ embodies the divine hypostasis, making God accessible in His person. Col 1:15-19’s “all the fullness of deity” dwelling bodily underscores this:
Christ is not a partial disclosure, but the full presence of God in human form.
Yet, the apophatic tradition, as articulated by Gregory of Nazianzus, insists on a nuanced balance:
“No one has yet breathed all of God; but is equally impious to say we have no knowledge, as it is to claim total comprehension”
The Deus Absconditus, as your interlocutor describes, reflects the divine essence’s ineffability-
God’s being is “unfathomable, incomprehensible” as Pseudo-Dionysius echoes in Mystical Theology, where the divine darkness signifies not absence but superabundant presence. The Incarnation does not negate this mytery but channels it:
Christ as Deus Revelatus, makes the Father known, yet His essence remains an infinite abyss. The torn veil unveils God, but the mystery of His being invites endless communion, not exhaustive comprehension.
Your Lutheran emphasis on knowing God “in Christ alone” aligns this but their quasi-palamite framing of grace as “God Himself in His uncreated energies” elevates the discussion.
While from what I know is that Lutheranism avoids strict Palamism, their nod to uncreated energies resonates with St. Gregory Palamas’s distinction in Triads, that we know God not in His essence but through His energies, @TheologyNerd, i totally agree here. His actions in creation, supremely manifest in Christ’s life, death and resurrection. This theological apex sees the Incarnation as the locus where grace, as God’s self-giving presence enables participation in the Trinity, fulfilling John 17:3 “This is eternal life: that they know You..and Jesus Christ” (I’m crying)
Jean-Luc Marion’s phenomenology of the “saturated phenomenon” further illustrates this that Christ’s divine nature overwhelms human cognition, not with absence but with excess as 2 Cor 4:6’s “knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ” suggests. This is not Kantian phenomenon but a divine presence accessible through faith’s relational act. Thomas Aquinas’s doctrine of analogy complements this that terms like “love” and " being" apply to God analogically, grounded in revelation, but at this philosophical apex, analogy gives way to participation. I had written this in answer to Johann, but after reading Johann’s post thoroughly, i will integrate the necessary changes.
The Deus Revelatus is not a concept to be grasped but a Person to be met, which lines with Augustine’s credo ut intelligam: faith opens the intellect to the divine
From what i feel, that the Lutheran distinction between Deus Absconditus and Deus Revelatus finds philosophical resonance in Martin Heidegger concept of aletheia, reinterpreted christologically. Christ is the unveiling of God’s truth, not as a static essence but as a dynamic event of presence. Yet the apophatic ensures that this unveiling doesnt exhaust the divine; as Dionysius’s “divine darkness” suggests, God’s essence transcends even the most profound revelation, inviting a knowledge that is relational, not possessive.
Deus Revelatus, God known in the “visible, enfleshed, suffering Christ” is a clarion call. John 1:18, Heb 1:3 and John 14:6 affirm that Christ is the sole path to knowing the Father. THeir point that human brokenness leads to idolatry, rather than worship underscores the necessity of Christ’s revelation: without the Incarnation, the Deus Absconditus remains veiled by our distorted passions. The suffering Christ, as Lutheran theology stresses, reveals God’s heart, His love and solidarity in the cross, making knowledge personal and salvific.
The quasi-Palamite framing of grace as “God Himself disposed toward us in Christ” aligns with the East’s essence-energies distinction, i see it, while it doesn’t fully endorse Palamism, but this one statement u made is extremely crucial.
Yet,
The Apophatic tradition, at its theological and philosohical zenith prevent this knowledge from becoming anthropocentric. St. Greogory of Nazianzus’s caution against “total comprehension” and Dinysius’s plunge into divine darkness ensure that Christ’s revelation, while definitive, opens into the infinite.
The Deus Absconditus, is not a barrier but a depth:
The Father known in Christ remains the ineffable Trinity whose mystery sustains awe
St. Cyril of Jerusalem writes that
“The Father is not known without the Son”
But the Son’s revelation invites us into a mystery that is relational, not reductive.
Note: Changes are yet to be done.
Im an Orthodox, and accept both Cataphatic and Apophatic, but i lean more on Apophatic side because i recognize that God is ultimately unknowable in essence.
I always remember this quote from St. Issac the Syrian, which is deep, and touches my heart. St. Issac the Syrian said:
“The closer a man approaches God, the more he sees himself as unworthy.”
Why? Because the infinite love of God is not only real, it’s overwhelming.
@ Samuel 23. Theology is only a study of mans beliefs about a god, and one can believe anything about a god proven in all the different denominations and belief systems claiming to know a truth.
The only reality of the God of heaven, which simply is Love and man is the kingdom in which He lives, is when one meets this reality and becomes your own disposition of mind. Until that actually happens within, that renewing of mind that only Love itself can manifest without biased ideas or wants or laws based on noting but speculations, beliefs, cancels out all beliefs and reality sets in.
Beliefs are not real, beliefs are mans own ideas and one can believe anything about a god. Truth comes only when one becomes in the same image of.
No doubt, @Mac, Orthodox theology (while it takes cataphatic+apophatic, i lean on the apophatic side but im open to both) indeed affirms that true knowledge of God transcends mere intellectual assent or belief systems, it is an ontological transformation rooted in theosis. But I believe that belief without participation remains incomplete, truth emerges as we are conformed to the likeness of God
@Samuel-23. When one has actually met the same God face to face as Jesus did in Matt 3:16, as Adam did in the garden and became like God to know the difference from beliefs and reality of. And as in Abraham, Moses, Mary, and 120. That conformation is instantaneous. It isn’t something we grow into it is something we have received, a gift we receive to be in Gods same image that only He can create man to be.
The simplicity of that revelation is we become the same Love of mind that He is, which is not something we learn through experience in trying, but actuals of receiving that cage of knowledge. That happens in the twinkling of an eye, all things become new, spiritually, a new heaven and earth is open in us just as a new heaven was opened in all of these and in Jesus in Matt 3:16. .
I see what you are saying, no doubt,but I slightly differ on one point:
While theosis is indeed a transformative participation in God’s life, Orthodox tradition also affirms moments of grace where this union is profoundly experienced “in the twinkling of an eye,” as you describe. Yet, this gift unfolds within the lifelong journey of synergy between divine grace and human response. Both instantaneous revelation and gradual growth coexist in the economy of salvation.
Your claim confuses personal spiritual experience with the biblical pattern of redemption, and collapses the objective work of Christ into subjective mysticism. What you describe is not what Scripture teaches about salvation, sanctification, or the image of God. You have bypassed the cross, skipped over repentance, and redefined new creation into self-deification.
First, Matthew 3:16 does not teach that Jesus became divine by receiving a spiritual awakening. He is already the Son of God before the Spirit descends. The voice from heaven declares, “This is my beloved Son” not because He entered divinity, but because He already is the divine Son, eternally begotten, not made. You cannot duplicate the baptism of the sinless Christ in sinful man. He is the Lamb, you are not.
Second, Adam did not “become like God” in a glorious spiritual encounter. He fell in Genesis 3 by believing the serpent’s lie: “you shall be like God, knowing good and evil.” Your wording dangerously echoes that same lie, confusing the image of God with equality to God. Adam’s eyes were opened, yes, but unto shame, death, and banishment, not spiritual enlightenment.
Third, the experience of Abraham, Moses, Mary, and the 120 in Acts 2 are not instant deifications but moments of God’s sovereign calling, unfolding over lifetime obedience. Abraham believed God and it was counted to him as righteousness (Genesis 15:6), but he also walked with God for decades. Moses was called in Exodus 3, but met God repeatedly with trembling and fear, veiling his face (Exodus 33:20). Mary received favor, not exaltation. The 120 in Acts 2 received the Spirit, but Peter still needed correction in Acts 10. No one in Scripture became the “same love of mind that God is” in an instant.
You quote 2 Corinthians 5:17 incorrectly. Yes, “If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation”, but this is not self-revelation. It is union with Christ by grace through faith. The newness is positionally in Christ, not mystical equality with God. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 13:12, “Now we see in a mirror dimly, then face to face”. The fullness comes later, not instantly.
Moreover, the language of “the same love of mind that He is” contradicts Isaiah 55:8–9: “My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways.” God’s mind and love are infinitely holy. We are conformed to His image through sanctification, not instant absorption.
Your “twinkling of an eye” reference is from 1 Corinthians 15:52, and it refers to the resurrection of the body at Christ’s return, not an inward mystical awakening. You are misusing Scripture to assert gnosis instead of gospel.
The idea that “a new heaven and earth opens in us” is not what Revelation teaches. Revelation 21 speaks of the future eschatological reality, not an inner realm you awaken to. The kingdom comes with the King, not through mystical elevation.
In sum, your framework:
• Replaces Christ’s atonement with inward experience
• Misuses Scripture to justify spiritual self-exaltation
• Echoes Gnostic heresies rather than apostolic doctrine
• Forgets the cross, bypasses repentance, and ignores sanctification
What Scripture teaches is that salvation is by grace, through faith in Christ crucified, resulting in new life, progressive holiness, and ultimate glorification at His coming. You do not become God. You become His child, redeemed by blood, adopted by mercy, and shaped into His image through suffering, obedience, and Spirit-led transformation.
Test your revelation by the Word, not by the sensation. If it bypasses Calvary, it is not light. It is deception.
J