... cannot, as a result of me being human, be wise is exactly the same way in which God is wise. This lead Aquinas to posit the idea that we can form an impression of God by describing what he isn't e.g. God is not mortal/finite/changing etc. We can use negative terms to describe God (hence the term Via Negativa). One could criticise this theory from the standpoint of believing that all religious language is meaningless by saying that if we can't describe what God is, what's the point in saying what he isn't? Surely saying what he isn't is stating nothing of any significance and doesn't dramatically increase our knowledge of God. If I attempt to describe an orange by saying that it isn't a banana am I actually positing anything? Although this example could be criticised by saying that we can actually comprehend an orange and not God. However ...

See this essay or coursework document in full right now