Aristotle was a great ‘categorizer’, right? He invented the game “21 Questions.” Is it an animal? (Yes). Vertibrate? (Yes) Mammal? (No), and so on.

Divine transcendence means, among other things I think, that there is no path to God by playing 21 Questions. Using all the categories of created things (the only categories WE have), we can never capture God without remainder (i.e., say WHAT God is)? God is, as Denys Turner says, incommensurable with creation. There is no set of questions you ask that would eventually transcend the otherness of God.

Now on the surface of it this would seem to leave us lost in an absolute agnosticism. But Turner says no, that doesn’t have to be the result. (Never mind Turner for now.). But it does influence how we view the whole natural theology project (esp., Process thought). And nobody can get you to God through rational questioning and categorical observation better than Hartshorne. I mean, that guy didn't need 21 Questions to say exactly WHAT and HOW God is, pretty much without remainder. He gets us there in only 6 questions (as Greg showed!). And I honestly LIKE Hartshorne. I mean, I like the JOURNEY. Not sure why. I think it's because you're always 'in control' of the questions and what counts as an answer. But I’m not sure I like the DESTINATION once Hartshorne drops us off.

Turner represents a more traditional/orthodox path. Rational thought and categorical observation cannot prove WHAT God is, cannot explicate God's infrastructure without remainder. But it can prove THAT God is, and in so doing prove the existence of a certain KIND of mystery. And God can still, in the end, be experienced, i.e., "tasted." And that's ineffable. Who can SAY what "sweetness" is?

Tom

Post Edited (Tom) : 3/3/2012 12:54:17 PM (GMT-6)