We saw that God's personal revelation of Himself took place through divine appearances, in various ways before the patriarchs and prophets in the Old Testament, and especially through His incarnated Son in the New Testament (Hebrews 1:1-2).

Can God reveal His divine nature to humans or angels? Can these people see Him, know Him, and have fellowship with Him?

The contrast in the expressions of the Holy Bible and the Fathers regarding the vision of God and communion with Him: The Bible answers questions related to this topic in contradictory terms. On the one hand, it affirms:

• “And he said, ‘You cannot see my face, for man will not see me and live’” (Exodus 33:20).

• “And it will come to pass, when my glory passes by, that I will place you in a cleft of the rock, and I will cover you with my hand until I pass by. Then I raise my hand and she looks behind me. But my face will not be seen” (Exodus 33:22).

• “And he said, Go out and stand on the mountain before the Lord. And behold, the Lord was passing by, and a great and strong wind had split the mountains and broken the rocks before the Lord, but the Lord was not in the wind. And after the wind there was an earthquake, and after the earthquake there was fire, but the Lord was not in the fire. And after the fire there was a low, gentle sound” (1 Kings 19:11-12).

• “No one has ever seen God. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, has made it known” (John 1:18 and 1 John 4:12).

• “And no one knows the Son except the Father. And no one knows the Father except the Son, and whoever the Son wants to reveal to him” (Matthew 11:27 and John 6:46, 10:15).

• “He alone has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen nor is able to see...” (1 Timothy 6:16).

While on the other hand it clearly appears:

• “So Jacob called the name of the place Peniel, saying, ‘Because I have seen God face to face, and life has been saved’” (Genesis 32:12).

• “And the Lord spoke to Moses face to face, as a man speaks to his friend” (Exodus 33:11).

• “As for me, I will appear before your face in righteousness, and I will be satisfied when your glory is revealed to me” (Psalm 17:15).

• “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will suffer God” (Matthew 5:8).

• “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth” (John 1:14).

• “And his appearance was transformed before them, and his face shone like the sun, and his clothes became white as light” (Matthew 17:2).

• “And we all, with unveiled face beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, as by the Lord the Spirit” (2 Corinthians 3:18).

• “God has given us the great and precious promises so that through them we may become partakers of the divine nature” (2 Peter 1:4).

• “And this is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent” (John 17:3).

So from a certain point of view, God is not able to be seen, approached, or have any fellowship with Him, while from another point of view, He is knowable, shared, seen, and accessible.

This contradiction also appears among the Holy Fathers. Saint Macarius of Egypt, for example, compares God with human nature and says: “He is God while she is not God. He is the master and she is the nation. He is the creator and she is the creation, and there is nothing in common between his nature and her.” He himself speaks elsewhere in his writings about the transformation of the soul into a divine nature (i.e., the deification of the soul by grace).

We give as another example St. Gregory the Theologian who, on the one hand, rejects the possibility of knowing the essence of God and even of the angels. But on the other hand, he declares that the Kingdom of God is the vision of the Holy Trinity, and that unity with God transcends all knowledge.

An example of the clear contradiction among the fathers is that they sometimes call God with a number of names and say many names about Him (Ανώνυμος), and at other times they declare that it is not correct to give God any name, and therefore they say about Him who has no name. (πολυώνυμος).

The truth is that there is a contradiction in the expression, but it is not a contradiction at all, as we will see. It suffices now to point out that these divine names that the fathers speak of are merely trying to describe what emanates from God, while in essence He cannot be named. This is how we say about God that He is existence, life, goodness, etc., because all of these arise from Him. But we declare in another way that He is not life, goodness, existence, etc., not in the sense that these are not in Him, but because He is beyond all of these.

The Western position on the issue of knowing and seeing God: The position of the Western Catholic Church in general, which it inherited from scholastic theologians, is to emphasize the possibility of knowing God with certainty through creatures through the light of natural human reason. This knowledge is not knowledge in the special sense, that is, not through God’s specific image or direct vision, but rather analogical knowledge (analogique). By this knowledge, Catholic theologians intend to apply to God the concepts and ideas they extract from creatures, relying in that on the similarity they find between them, and on the connection between creatures and God as their efficient and ideal cause. Thus, this relationship of similarity is the basis of all natural knowledge of God.

Regarding the vision of God Himself, the Catholic Church, along with the Fathers in general, says that man cannot know, see, or perceive the entity (essence) of God in this life. But she disagrees with them about her belief in supernatural knowledge of an entity (essence) in the afterlife. As an example of this, Pope Benedict XII said in his doctrinal decree:

Benedictus Deus in the year 1336: “The souls of the saints see the Divine Essence with an eye to eye, face to face, without the intermediary of creatures that act as a visible subject. Rather, it is the divine essence that reveals itself to her directly, clearly and clearly. Papal theologians supported this opinion with verses from the Bible, the most important of which are:

• We now see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face (1 Corinthians 13:12).

• We know that when he appears, we will be like him because we will see him as he is (John 3:2 and Matthew 5:8).

As well as sayings from the fathers that speak of a clear vision of God in the afterlife. But these verses and sayings do not, in fact, speak about seeing the essence of God Himself in the next life, but rather His natural glory face to face, that is, in a way that is better suited to changing our situations in that life.

Protestants agree with Catholics regarding the possibility of knowing God through His creation, an analogical, analogical knowledge, as if they say, for example: “Our knowledge of God is based on removing from our minds everything that sets a limit to Him, and by attributing every virtue to Him to an infinite degree, as well as every apparent attribute in His works.” . Since we resemble him because we are his children, we attribute to him the qualities of our spiritual and mental nature to an unlimited degree. Like them, they do not believe that it is possible to see or know God directly in this life. They often do not pay much attention to this topic, if we exclude studies on the topic of divine appearances in the Bible, which they consider to be a special divine revelation that has no relation to the topic of deification and holiness, which is rejected by them. Because they emphasize salvation through faith alone, and they consider that man here on earth cannot reach the stage of complete holiness because he lives in a weak body.

The position of the fathers in general on the issue of knowing God and seeing Him: The first impression that the writings of the Holy Fathers give about God is their feeling of awe, ignorance, and astonishment. For example, Ephrem the Syrian refuses to search for knowledge of God, because what is impossible for nature to approach is frightening. Saint Cyril of Jerusalem says: Admitting ignorance is great knowledge in matters related to God. Perhaps we are not exaggerating if we say that the prominent feature that distinguishes the way most fathers express themselves in their talk about God is their dissociation of Him, the Almighty, from everything that might come to the mind of humans in terms of perceptions, ideas, or similes, which is what is called dispassionate theology. As an example of this expression, we present a statement by Saint John of Damascus that summarizes the view of the fathers who preceded him: “It is impossible for a person to say what God is according to essence. Therefore, it is appropriate to talk about God in a way that distances Him from everything that is known. God is not one of the beings, not because He is not a being, but because He is above beings, and even above being.

Regarding the biblical and patristic expressions that constitute the first part of the contradiction referred to at the beginning of this chapter, the Fathers agree that what is meant by them is the inability to see or know God according to His essence. Because the divine essence is absolutely and absolutely incapable of being seen, perceived, or shared by creatures, including saints and angels, whether in this life or in the afterlife:

• It is clear that God exists, but what He is according to essence and nature is completely incomprehensible and unknown (John of Damascus).

• No man has ever found, and will never find, what God is according to nature and essence (Gregory of Nazianzus).

• “Knowing” for disembodied spirits is what the word “revelation” means for them. However, neither angels nor archangels know the essence of God. They do not even seek to know what God is according to essence, as Eunomius did, but they glorify Him and prostrate to Him without ceasing (John Chrysostom).

As for the second part of the contradiction, which is declared in the verses that talk about the possibility of God’s vision and participation, it refers, according to some fathers, to God’s condescension to the weakness of those who saw, and His appearance to them in ways that they can accept:

• If Isaiah, Ezekiel, or the other prophets had actually seen the same essence of God, each of them would not have seen it differently. Because God says to Hosea: “And I have multiplied the visions, and by the hand of the prophets I have presented parables” (Hosea 12:11). This means that I did not reveal my essence, but rather (through vision) I condescended towards the weakness of those who saw (John Chrysostom).

• God, according to His essence, is incomprehensible. Although He appears according to His pleasure and is seen. However, we do not see it as a finite whole, but rather according to the measure by which it appears to us. That is, he adapts this vision according to our ability to understand/accept/ (Epiphanius of Cyprus).

This divine condescension to the level of our weakness is called by other fathers a descent of God’s powers toward us. That is why we can know Him and see Him through these forces, while His essence remains incomprehensible and unapproachable:

• We say that we know our God through His powers, on the one hand, but we reject the possibility of approaching Him in essence, on the other hand. Because his powers (ενέργειαι αυτού) descend towards us, but his essence remains unapproachable to him (Basil the Great).

• The Master believes when he tells that the pure in heart will see God. Likewise, Paul does not lie when he shows with his well-known word that no one has ever seen God and cannot see Him. Because it is by nature invisible. But he becomes visible through the powers by which he sees what is around him (Gregory of Nazianzus).

• God is shareable according to his transmitting powers, but he is not shareable or anything in terms of his essence (Maximus the Confessor).

These powers, according to the fathers, are the same as what the Book called “the face of God that is seen” (Genesis 32:30, Exodus 33:11), His glory that is seen (Numbers 12:7-8, Psalm 17:15, John 1:14, 2 Corinthians 3:8), and His light that shines. (Matthew 17:2, Mark 9:3, Luke 9:29) and His kingdom that is coming (Luke 17:20, 9:27, Matthew 1:17, Mark 1:15) and His eternal life that He gives (John 3:15-16), which itself is the knowledge of God ( John 17:3), or a vision of God (John 6:40), or gifts or graces of God (Romans 12:6, 1 Corinthians 12:4-31).

Certainly, these powers are not created because they are divine:

• The Divine is truly fire, uncreated, without beginning, and immaterial. It is also indescribable and unchangeable. It cannot be extinguished, does not die, and cannot be fully comprehended because it transcends all creatures (Simon the Modern Theologian).

But this does not mean that it cannot be seen, as the patriarchs, prophets, apostles, and saints saw it in their earthly lives, after they reached, with the help of these powers, a high degree of pure life, pure of passions, and thus to being filled with the gifts of the Holy Spirit, any of these powers. Because it is impossible to know God or see His divine powers except with the help of these powers: “And by your light we see the light.” “For God, who said that light should shine out of darkness, has shone in our hearts to give light to the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ” (2 Corinthians 4:6).

• This light separated me from every visible being and gave me the vision of the uncreated, and united me with the uncreated, the incorruptible, and all that is infinitely viewable (Simeon the Modern Theologian).

The position of the Universal Orthodox Church regarding seeing and knowing God, then, was clear from the beginning, especially after the conflict of its holy fathers in the fourth century with the heretic Eunomius and their emphasis against him that the divine essence cannot be seen at all. As for the afterlife, it was also clear that what we will see in that life is not the divine essence, but rather the divine glory, that is, the divine powers through the human nature of Christ.

• In the afterlife, we will see Christ clothed in divine glory, and then the vision of God will become face to face. Because God became a man, and therefore we will see him in (through) the human nature of Christ (John Chrysostom).

This divine glory, as Saint Cyril of Alexandria explains, is the eternal glory of Christ, meaning it is the glory shared with the Father and the Holy Spirit.

The position of Saint Gregory Palmas: In the fourteenth century he attacked some members of the cultural milieu in Constantinople (*)Accused of philosophical issues, the spiritual way of life of the monks of Mount Athos emphasizes the practice of the Jesus Prayer, inner purification, and the possibility of seeing divine glory in this life. The recluse Gregorios Palmas was forced, at the request of his fellow monks, to rise up to defend them orally and in writing. Several councils were also held in Constantinople to consider the issue, and as a result of this theological battle in which Saint Palmas was victorious, and which focused in particular on the nature of the light that the three apostles saw on the Mount of Transfiguration, the Orthodox point of view regarding the problem of the possibility of communion with God was clarified and took a clear formulation. .

This formulation, which was crystallized by the writings of Saint Palmas and the decisions of the aforementioned councils, which agree with the opinion of the holy fathers from the earliest times, is summed up in the fact that when God forms a relationship with us, he does not participate with us according to his essence and not according to his three hypostases, but rather according to his uncreated powers or activities. Therefore, the grace of the Holy Spirit that descends to us is not his divine essence, but it is also not created, but rather it is an eternal divine grace emanating from the divine essence and not separate from it.

This grace, like all the powers that emanate from God, are manifestations or manifestations of the existence that transcends all existence, or as Saint Gregory Palmas calls it: “the connections of the divine existence with everything that is not God.” This is because the existing world cannot rise to the level of divine essence, but can only derive from these forces emanating from it. Naturally, the world itself was created according to God’s powers and not according to its essence, otherwise it would be eternal like it. God creates and works through it, so it permeates everything: “In Him we live and move and have our being” (Acts 17:28).

It is obvious that the function of these powers is not only in their relationship with creatures, because God, regardless of the existence of creatures that could not have existed, has always been manifested before the ages with these powers that radiate eternally from Him. From here we understand the meaning of the Apostle Paul’s phrase: “He alone has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light” (1 Timothy 6:16). This light is the same as the divine glory or the powers or activities of God emanating from the depth of His existence, by which Jesus appeared transfigured on the mountain before the apostles. It is the light emanating from the face of God that illuminated the face of Moses. It is the Kingdom of Heaven in which the righteous shine like the sun, and from which those who live with God, and from now on, derive their bliss, vitality, and peace. As for their complete life and continuous witnessing of divine glory, it will take place in the life to come. However, there is continuous progress, whether in this life, or in the future life, in receiving the divine light, but without the creation being able, not once, to see the divine essence.

What the prophets, apostles and saints saw, according to Palmas, is the light or glory of God, and since the light of God is divine, it is eternal and unlimited, meaning it is not subject to the dimensions of time and space and is not capable of perception and description by created beings. How were these created beings able to see God and describe what they saw?

Saint Palmas' answer is that these blessed ones got rid of the characteristic of time and space for a short time and tasted the reality of eternity. Therefore, their vision cannot be described as merely a sensory or mental vision. It is a participation of the human being as a whole (soul and body) with the uncreated, and this participation that goes beyond the limits of created nature presupposes the unity of the human person with God, who is above all understanding and above all mind. Saint Palmas says: “He who participates in the divine activity becomes himself, to some extent, light. He unites with the light, and thanks to it he sees clearly what those who do not have this grace cannot see. Because it transcends not only the human senses, but also everything that the mind (gold) can perceive. The pure in heart will see God who dwells in them as light, and who reveals himself to those who love him.” In other words, the uncreated light radiates in man as a whole and makes him live in the company of the Holy Trinity. This communion with God in which the righteous will shine is the same as the bliss of the coming age, that is, the state of divinized creatures in which God will become all in all, not according to essence, but according to effectiveness, that is, through uncreated grace or uncreated light.

In short, “uncreated light is participation in the divine grace by which God makes himself known to those who unite with him and go beyond the limits of created being.” The experience of this participation is given to each person according to his measure, as it can be greater or less according to the merit of those who taste it. This complete vision of divinity that is felt as uncreated light is the mystery of the eighth day related to the coming age when we will see God face to face. In sum, all worthy people who are united with God will see from their present life “the kingdom of God has come with power” as the disciples saw it on Mount Tabor.

Based on the above, we can say that the many names that we give to God refer to the powers or activities of God. One of them we call life because it creates life, the other is goodness because it is the source of goodness, another is existence because it is the originator of existence, and the other is light because it gives the possibility of seeing the divine light... etc...

As for the essence of God himself, it will remain beyond any force or work, and therefore there is no name that is correct to give to this secret existence that transcends any existence. For example, the ego in a person is not a thought, feeling, movement, etc., even though all of these emanate from him. Realistically, there is no name that can apply to it. However, we are forced to give him a title that takes the role of a noun. How much more is the essence of God!!!

Discussing Western criticism of the position of Saint Gregory Palmas: Some Western writers expressed their opinions on the doctrinal disputes of the fourteenth century, seeing in Saint Palmas's position on divine light and divine powers a new heresy, while presenting his enemies as defenders of the common tradition of East and West.

Their criticism of Saint Gregory centered around the fact that he taught, according to their claim, that there is a real difference between the divine essence and the divine forces or activities, which is inconsistent with the simplicity of God.

In fact, Saint Palmas distinguishes between substance and powers, which he considers to emanate from the essence or the common nature of the three hypostases, but he does not teach at all that there is a composition and difference in divinity because, according to Palmas, substance and powers are not two different parts of God, but rather they are two different ways of God’s existence, in Its essence and beyond its essence. Thus God remains completely unapproachable according to His essence and actually participates according to grace.

As we have learned from divine revelation and from previous fathers, the simplicity of God is a paradoxical simplicity, just like all things that concern God. That is, it does not prevent discrimination, but it does not accept division or separation in the divine being. For example, Westerners reject the distinction between essence and divine forces under the pretext of simplicity, and do not reject the distinction between essence and divine hypostases, or between the hypostases themselves because of the same argument? Even in our created reality, does not human thought remain simple despite the possibilities it contains and the activities it produces? Thus, God's infinite potentials and infinite activities remain united with His essence. This is why Saint Gregory sometimes talks about an infinite number of forces or activities, and other times about a single force or activity. Hence, the incomprehensible antithesis of God is not only between essence and hypostases, or between essence and forces, but it is also between the forces themselves. Therefore, it can be said that there is an infinite number of powers and activities with God, or it can be said that there is one power or activity with Him, the Almighty. Because God's activities, which are infinite in number and diversity, are one, being the movement and power of one God (for example, the sun).
Here we must mention that the teaching about divine powers, whose roots we find in the Holy Bible and the ancient fathers, was not the result of philosophical reflections, but rather was the result of a life experience with God, in which the saints discovered that their participation in God was not according to His essence, which cannot be seen or approached. To Him, but rather it was according to His grace, which they experienced and tasted as divine because it connected them directly to the uncreated and incomprehensible God. This experience alone can explain the contradiction in the divine vision that we referred to above.

Finally, it remains for us to ask the Western critics of Saint Gregory three crucial questions that the saint’s ideas appeared during his dispute with the opponents of his time, which are the following:

1. If we deny knowledge, vision, or direct participation of God during life, how can we explain the many texts in the Bible and among the Fathers that confirm this participation? Saint Gregory refers to this point and says: “We have received from the esteemed theologians both things together, which is that the essence of God is not subject to contribution and that it is to some extent prior. That we participate in the divine nature and do not participate at all. Therefore, we must preserve both matters and place them in their proper place of good worship.

2. If we consider that Saint Gregory is an innovator because of his words about the divine powers emanating from the divine essence and uniting with it. Were the fathers who spoke about divine powers or activities before him, such as the Cappadocians, Dionysius, who was called the Areoges, Maximus the Confessor, John of Damascus, and Simon the Modern Theologian, also innovators?

3. If we reject the distinction between the divine essence and the divine powers or activities, we are forced to acknowledge that the gifts and graces of God, given for the sake of saving man, are created, and then how can He save man? And he deifies him Who is not divine? And wouldn’t these created blessings separate God from man immeasurably more than if these blessings were not created?

Here we reach the pivotal point that occupied the fathers’ minds in their struggle with the heretics of all ages and on the basis of which they evaluated any heresy. It is that Christ came to save mankind and deify them, and therefore everything that agrees with this salvation and deification is consistent with the integrity of faith, and everything that hinders it is inevitably against faith. Gregory Palmas summarized this same position against the heresy of his time with the following statement:

• Either we accept the distinction between essence and activities, while they are forced, based on their philosophical idea of God’s simplicity, to include God’s glory, grace, and light of manifestation among creatures. Or they must radically reject this distinction, and then they are forced to reconcile what is unknowable with what is possible to know, between the inability to share and the ability to share it, and between essence and grace. In both cases, the deification of the created being becomes impossible, and with it all actual possibility of participation with God.

(*) The first of these was the Calvary-born monk Barlaam, who studied in Rome and was accustomed to looking at theology through philosophical and rational data. Therefore, it was natural for him, after his visit to Mount Athos, to mock the manner of his monks, called hesychast. In which they emphasize the constant practice of mental prayer and believe that it is possible to see the divine light. Among these attackers also was Icandinus, who translated the Summa Theologiae (by Thomas Aquinas) into Greek, as well as the writer “Nicephorus Gregoras.” For more about this stage, see the biography of Saint Gregory Palamas.