The Nature of Knowledge of God

As far as is possible for his nature and generation to present himself for discovery, we have grasped what is known of him, 'because the known of God is manifest in him' (Rom 1:20), not simply himself, but the known. We recognize him: that he is creator, that he is providential, that he is unshakeable, and unchangeable. And I wish to grasp a logical theorem.

Demonstrations are scientific theories; for there are two kinds of syllogisms—forgive me now for remembering the eristic and the sophistic—the dialectical is among the more glorious, which they call the argumentative. This demonstration comes from what seems to men, not from the nature of things. The demonstrative one from these things themselves is not from the judgment of men, but from the existence of the subjects concerning which we wish to take scientific theory. It is therefore impossible for an irrefutable demonstration to come from opinions.

Demonstrations are from assertions; for if I wish to demonstrate that man is a rational being, I say something: he is not without soul; for many other things are without soul, and the irrational. I must therefore demonstrate this: man is receptive of sciences. Everything receptive of sciences is rational. Therefore, man is rational.

And even if we have knowledge concerning God, even if it were perfect, we have it from assertions, saying that he is incorporeal. But the incorporeal is an assertion of a body the absence of body. It is immortality, without beginning, and unchangeable. Even if a perfect knowledge concerning God should exist upon the perfection of things, it is not that knowledge which God himself has concerning himself; for he will not negate the generated, knowing himself to be ungenerated, as the Eunomians themselves desire; for he will not deny death, knowing himself to be immortal. We, by the deprivation of what we know, know what is immortal.

And we do not have, according to scientific knowledge, the power to impose upon that which is said to be contrary to death, and we call him the deprivation of death, and everything, such as invisible; we do not learn him to be invisible according to any assertion, but because we know what is visible, having sensation and having sight, by the deprivation of this state we take the invisible. I say these things because of the Eunomians, that it is impossible to have the same knowledge of God as God has concerning God. It is not that knowledge which God himself has concerning himself.

And another thing: our knowledge is a disposition of the soul. But dispositions receive the more and the less. But the knowledge of God, which he has, whether concerning himself or concerning some other, is not a disposition; it is essential. And just as I say 'hot' and I say 'fire', and I say 'the heated water', but the water...