51. Knowledge of God and the Divine Names

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

The Three Lights of Knowledge #

Berquist explains Thomas’s doctrine that knowledge comes through three divine gifts:

1. The natural light of reason - by which we know God through creatures and sensible effects
2. The light of faith - which strengthens natural reason and provides fuller knowledge through revelation
3. The light of glory - the beatific vision whereby we see God as He is

These correspond to James 1:17: “Every perfect gift is coming down from the father of lights” (lights in the plural).

The Problem of Divine Satisfaction #

Drawing on Thomas’s Summa Contra Gentiles III, Berquist traces the progression of God-knowledge:

• Mere knowledge that God exists is insufficient
• Philosophical knowledge of God obtained through natural reason is insufficient
• Even knowledge of God through faith is imperfect and unsatisfying in this life
• Only the beatific vision—seeing God as He is face to face—can satisfy the human intellect

This dissatisfaction extends even to knowledge itself: the more we know, the more we desire to know. The more we know about God without knowing what He is, the more we want to know His essence.

The Connection Between Knowledge and Names #

Thomas’s fundamental principle: “For each thing is named by us according as we know it.” Therefore, Question 13 on divine names necessarily follows Question 12 on divine knowledge. If we cannot think about God without ordering our thoughts through words, then proper speech about God is essential to proper thinking about God.

Berquist emphasizes the role of language in thought: one cannot order thinking without ordering the words that signify those thoughts. Logic itself is “reason ordering its thinking, and the vocal sounds that signify these thoughts.”

The Twelve Articles of Question 13 #

The lecture previews the structure of the question:

Articles 1-7: General principles about naming God

• Article 1: Whether God is nameable by us at all
• Article 2: Whether names said of God are said substantially
• Article 3: Whether names are said properly or metaphorically
• Article 4: Whether many names of God are synonyms
• Article 5: Whether names are said univocally or equivocally of God and creatures
• Article 6: (mentioned but not detailed)
• Article 7: Whether some names are said of God from time (i.e., temporally)

Articles 8-11: Particular divine names

• Articles 8-10: The name “God” (Deus) - three articles specifically on this single name
• Article 11: The name “I Am” (Qui Est) - whether this is the most proper name of God

Article 12: Affirmative propositions about God

• Whether affirmative statements can be made about God, or only negative statements

Key Arguments #

Against Naming God #

The Problem of Unknowability: God is unknowable in His essence in this life (from Question 12). How then can He be named?

The Problem of Simplicity: God is absolutely simple. How can many distinct names be truly said of Him without implying composition?

The Concrete/Abstract Dilemma:

• Concrete names (“good,” “wise”) seem to imply composition, as if God has goodness
• Abstract names (“goodness,” “wisdom”) seem to deny that God is good or wise
• How can both be true when God is completely simple?

For Naming God #

Scripture: God names Himself (“I Am Who Am” to Moses). Scripture speaks of God with many names and attributes.

Creatures as Likenesses: Every creature represents God and possesses some perfection. These creaturely perfections are likenesses of God’s infinite perfection, making it possible to name God from creatures.

Necessity of Speech: We cannot think about God without language. As Augustine discovered, by listening to Ambrose’s words, the thoughts came. Words come first in learning; thoughts follow.

Important Definitions #

Key Terms Related to Error and Wandering #

• Error (Latin): From the verb meaning “to wander”
• Plane (Greek): Also from a word meaning “to wander”; the source of the English word “planet” because planets appear to wander across the sky
• When the mind wanders (from proper order), it falls into error

The Relationship Between Thoughts and Words #

Thomas suggests in his commentary on Aristotle’s Perihermeneas that we order our thoughts by ordering the words that signify them. A statement (ἀπόφανσις/enuntiatio) is defined as a vocal sound—not merely a thought, but an expressed thought.

Metonymy in Scripture #

When Scripture says “our help is in the name of the Lord” or “praise the name of the Lord,” it uses metonymy—a figure of speech giving the name for the named, the container for the contained. Similarly, “let the earth praise the Lord” uses metonymy: the men on the earth praise, not the earth itself.

Examples & Illustrations #

The Pharaoh’s Dreams #

Joseph interprets the Pharaoh’s dreams (fat cattle and lean cattle) through a superior light of understanding beyond natural reason. Similarly, the light of faith allows prophets to understand the meaning of divinely formed images more fully than natural reason alone.

Personal Examples of Dissatisfaction #

Berquist illustrates the principle that earthly knowledge and states never satisfy the human longing:

• In high school, he thought college would be wonderful; in college, he found problems
• In college, he thought teaching would be ideal; teaching has its difficulties
• Retirement seemed attractive until faced with home repairs, social security, health insurance
• Old age brings its own problems

As Thackeray writes in Vanity Fair: “For who in this life ever gets what he wants? Or, having gotten it, to satisfy?”

The Burning Bush #

Church Fathers interpret the burning bush (Exodus 3) as a metaphor for the Incarnation:

• The fire represents divine nature
• The bush represents human nature
• The bush not being consumed signifies that divine nature does not destroy human nature
• Fire’s light metaphorically represents divine understanding
• Fire’s heat metaphorically represents divine love
• Fire’s transformative power metaphorically represents divine power
• Fire itself (the substance) can metaphorically represent the Trinity, with light (the Son) and heat (the Holy Spirit) proceeding from it (the Father)

The Circle and Radii #

A circle has one center point that is truly the beginning of many distinct radiating lines. Similarly, God is absolutely simple yet is truly the source of many distinct perfections found in creatures. Our knowledge begins from creatures (the distinct endpoints of the lines) and proceeds to God (the simple center), which explains why we have many names for the simple God—they correspond to distinct creaturely perfections that all converge in God’s simple essence.

The Development of Prayer #

Christ teaches the Apostles to pray by teaching them words (the Our Father). Initially, children merely memorize words. But with the words come the thoughts. Berquist notes this illustrated in Psalm 19: “Let the words of my mouth and the thought of my heart find favor before you”—the words come first, then the thoughts follow.

Notable Quotes #

“For each thing is named by us according as we know it.” — Thomas Aquinas, premiss to Question 13

“If you don’t know how to talk about God, you don’t know how to think about God.” — Duane Berquist

“Every perfect gift is coming down from the father of lights.” — James 1:17, cited regarding the three lights of knowledge

“I am who am.” — God to Moses (Exodus 3:14), identified as the most proper name of God

“You are she who is not.” — Christ to St. Catherine of Siena, illustrating the use of the divine name “I am” in intimate revelation

“For who in this life ever gets what he wants? Or, having gotten it, to satisfy?” — Thackeray, Vanity Fair, illustrating the insufficiency of earthly satisfaction

“Words without thoughts go to heaven.” — Shakespeare, cited regarding the necessity of both words and thoughts in prayer

“Let the words of my mouth and the thought of my heart find favor before you.” — Psalm 19, illustrating the order of words preceding thoughts

Questions Addressed #

Why Question 13 Follows Question 12 #

Because naming depends on knowing. Since Question 12 treated how we know God, Question 13 naturally addresses how we speak about God, for speech must correspond to knowledge.

How Can God Be Named If Unknowable in Essence? #

God can be named according to how He is known by us through creatures. Names truly signify God but imperfectly, corresponding to the imperfect way creatures represent Him.

Why Multiple Names for the Simple God? #

Our many names correspond to the many distinct perfections found in creatures, all of which pre-exist simply and unitedly in God. Since we know God from creatures, our naming necessarily reflects the multiplicity of creaturely perfections.

What Is the Relationship Between Concrete and Abstract Names? #

Both are necessary. Concrete names (“God is good”) express His perfection and subsistence; abstract names (“God is goodness”) express His simplicity. Both have apparent defects yet both are true and necessary for adequate (though still inadequate) speech about God.

Are All Names Said of God Metaphorically or Are Some Proper? #

Thomas will argue (as previewed) that some names are said of God properly, not all metaphorically. The distinction between proper and metaphorical names is a major theme of Question 13.

How Is “God Created the World” Said If God Is Eternal? #

When we say God is “Creator” or “Ruler,” we use names that seem to involve time and change, yet God is eternal and unchanging. This raises the problem of whether names can be said of God temporally or only eternally.

Philosophical Context #

The Influence of Dionysius the Areopagite #

Berquist notes that Dionysius wrote a book on divine names (De Divinis Nominibus), not on God Himself, emphasizing that theology proceeds through understanding how God is named. Dionysius also wrote on divine names said metaphorically, indicating the division between proper and metaphorical predication.

The Role of Logic #

Following Aristotle, who defined a statement (λόγος/sermo) as a vocal sound, Thomas grounds the importance of names in the fundamental structure of logic itself. Proper speech about God is inseparable from proper thinking about God.

Aristotle’s Argument for the Earth’s Roundness #

Berquist cites Aristotle’s argument that the earth is round based on the circular shadow it casts on the moon—an example of how geometry underlies physical understanding, paralleling how fundamental sciences ground derivative ones (like astronomy borrowing from geometry).