John Owen articulates a doctrine fundamental to classical theism: the absolute incomprehensibility of God. In his Christologia, he asserts, “God, in his own essence, being, and existence, is absolutely incomprehensible. His nature being immense, and all his holy properties essentially infinite, no creature can directly or perfectly comprehend them, or any of them. He must be infinite that can perfectly comprehend that which is infinite; wherefore God is perfectly known unto himself only—but as for us, how little a portion is heard of him!” (Owen, Works, 65). This paper will analyze Owen’s statement, situating it within the broader Christian tradition, engaging biblical exegesis, and considering its theological implications.

The Biblical Foundation for Divine Incomprehensibility

The incomprehensibility of God is deeply rooted in Scripture. Owen’s assertion reflects passages such as Isaiah 40:28: “The Lord is the everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth. He does not faint or grow weary; his understanding is unsearchable.” The Hebrew phrase לְאֵ֖ין חֵֽקֶר (le’ēn ḥēqer) denotes that God’s understanding is beyond investigation or measurement, emphasizing its boundlessness. Similarly, Romans 11:33 proclaims, “Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways!” The Greek term ἀνεξιχνίαστοι (anexichniastoi), translated as “unsearchable,” means incapable of being traced out, reinforcing the idea that God’s knowledge is beyond finite comprehension.

Job 26:14 states, “Behold, these are but the outskirts of his ways, and how small a whisper do we hear of him! But the thunder of his power who can understand?” The Hebrew word קָצֶה (qāṣeh), translated as “outskirts,” suggests that what is known of God is merely the fringes of his ways, aligning with Owen’s claim that only a portion of God’s nature is revealed to us. Similarly, in 1 Corinthians 2:11, Paul writes, “For who knows a person’s thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.” The verb ἐπιγινώσκει (epiginōskei), meaning to know fully or completely, is negated here, affirming that no creature can attain exhaustive knowledge of God’s mind apart from divine revelation.

Historical Theological Context

Owen stands within a long line of Christian thinkers who have affirmed divine incomprehensibility. Augustine, in De Trinitate, emphasizes that “if you comprehend it, it is not God” (1.2.2), acknowledging the creaturely limitations in grasping the divine essence. Thomas Aquinas, following Aristotle’s distinction between essence and existence, argues in the Summa Theologiae (I.12.1) that no created intellect can fully comprehend God. This doctrine finds further development in John Calvin’s Institutes, where he describes God’s essence as “incomprehensible” and warns against speculative theology divorced from divine revelation (1.5.9). Owen, therefore, stands in the tradition that maintains God’s self-revelation is true yet never exhaustive.

Theological Implications

Owen’s doctrine of incomprehensibility safeguards the Creator-creature distinction. If God were fully comprehensible, he would be reduced to the limits of human cognition, undermining his transcendence. At the same time, this doctrine does not lead to agnosticism. Owen’s phrase, “how little a portion is heard of him,” echoes Job 26:14, indicating that while God’s essence remains beyond full human apprehension, he has graciously revealed himself through Scripture and ultimately in Christ (Heb 1:1–3). The Greek of Hebrews 1:3 describes Christ as the χαρακτήρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως αὐτοῦ (charaktēr tēs hypostaseōs autou), meaning the exact imprint of God’s nature, affirming that while God’s essence remains infinite and incomprehensible, his self-revelation in Christ is true and sufficient for salvation.

Divine incomprehensibility, therefore, does not negate knowledge of God but conditions it, ensuring that theology remains an act of worshipful humility rather than intellectual conquest. Paul affirms this paradox in 1 Corinthians 13:12: “For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.” The Greek phrase δι’ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι (di’ esoptrou en ainigmati) conveys an enigmatic or veiled knowledge of divine things, highlighting the eschatological hope of fuller understanding in glory.

Conclusion

John Owen’s articulation of divine incomprehensibility affirms that God’s essence and attributes, being infinite, cannot be fully grasped by finite creatures. This doctrine, deeply embedded in biblical revelation and Christian tradition, preserves both the majesty of God and the necessity of divine revelation. As theologians and believers reflect on the mystery of God, Owen’s words remind us that true knowledge of God is always marked by reverence and dependence on his self-disclosure.