Communicable vs Incommunicable Attributes of God's Nature

The distinction between communicable and incommunicable attributes of God's nature is a theological concept used to categorize the characteristics of God. Communicable attributes are those that can be shared or reflected in humans, while incommunicable attributes are unique to God and cannot be shared.

The biblical basis for understanding God's attributes lies in passages that describe God's nature, such as God's declaration to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM" (not directly quoted in the sources but referenced in the context of God's character). The Bible attributes various characteristics to God, including being a spirit (John 4:24) ^[1], invisible (Col 1:15; 1Ti 1:17) ^[1], unsearchable (Job 11:7; Ps 145:3) ^[1], and omnipotent (Ge 17:1; Ex 6:3) ^[1].

The concept of communicable attributes is rooted in the idea that humans are created in the image of God (Ge 1:26-27). According to Reformed theologian Charles Hodge, the image of God in humans implies a capacity for divine attributes, although this capacity is limited ^[3]. For instance, humans can reflect God's love, justice, and wisdom to a certain extent. God's love is described as a fundamental aspect of His nature (1Jo 4:8,16) ^[1], and humans are called to love God and their neighbors.

In contrast, incommunicable attributes are those that are unique to God and cannot be shared or replicated in humans. These include attributes such as omniscience (Ps 139:1-6; Pr 5:21) ^[1], omnipresence (Ps 139:7; Jer 23:23) ^[1], and immutability (Ps 102:26,27; Jas 1:17) ^[1]. According to Aquinas, God's essence is simple and indivisible, making some attributes incommunicable ^[2].

The distinction between communicable and incommunicable attributes is not always clear-cut and has been debated among theologians. The Lutheran doctrine of the communication of attributes, for example, posits that the human nature of Christ participates in the divine attributes, such as omniscience and omnipotence ^[4]. In contrast, Reformed theologians like Calvin and Hodge reject this view, arguing that the human nature of Christ remains distinct from the divine nature, even in the person of Christ ^{[7, 3]}.

The early Church Fathers, such as Augustine, also grappled with the nature of God's attributes. Augustine notes that God's attributes, such as wisdom and power, are not separate from His essence but are identical with it ^[8]. This understanding is reflected in the Catholic Scholastic tradition, which emphasizes the simplicity of God's essence.

The concept of communicable and incommunicable attributes has implications for understanding the nature of God and humanity's relationship with God. While humans can reflect certain divine attributes, they cannot fully comprehend or replicate God's incommunicable attributes. This distinction highlights the mystery and transcendence of God's nature, as noted by Augustine ^[6].

The complexity of this distinction is further underscored by the various ways in which different Christian traditions articulate the relationship between God's attributes and human nature. The Reformed tradition, for example, emphasizes the distinction between God's essence and human nature, while the Lutheran tradition posits a more intimate connection between the two ^{[5, 4]}.

The biblical affirmation that humans are created in God's image (Ge 1:26-27) remains a foundational aspect of understanding the communicable attributes of God. As humans reflect on God's nature, they are drawn into a deeper understanding of their own nature and their relationship with God.

Sources

Torrey's Topical Textbook “Torrey's Topical Textbook: God — Is a spirit -- Joh 4:24; 2Co 3:17. Is declared to be Light. -- Isa 60:19; Jas 1:17; 1Jo 1:5. Love. -- 1Jo 4:8,16. Invisible. -- Job 23:8,9; Joh 1:18; 5:37; Col 1:15; 1Ti 1:17. Unsearchable. -- Job 11:7; 37:23; Ps 145:3; Isa 40:28; Ro 11:33. Incorruptible. -- Ro 1:23. Eternal. -- De 33:27; Ps 90:2; Re 4:8-10. Immortal. -- 1Ti 1:17; 6:16. Omnipotent. -- Ge 17:1; Ex 6:3. Omniscient. -- Ps 139:1-6; Pr 5:21. Omnipresent. -- Ps 139:7; Jer 23:23. Immutable. -- Ps 102:26,27; Jas 1:17. Only-wise. -- Ro 16:27; 1Ti 1:17. Glorious. -- Ex 15:11; Ps 145:5. Most High. -- Ps 8”
theology (Catholic (Scholastic)) “Aquinas, Summa Theologica, First Part (Prima Pars), The Names of God, Art. 9: Article: Whether this name "God" is communicable? I answer that, A name is communicable in two ways: properly, and by similitude. It is properly communicable in the sense that its whole signification can be given to many; by similitude it is communicable according to some part of the signification of the name. For instance this name "lion" is properly communicable to all things of the same nature as "lion"; by similitude it is communicable to those who participate in the nature of a lion, as for instance by courage, ”
CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 2, section 83: urged by Lutherans as well as others against the Romish doctrine of transubstantiation that it supposes the accidents, or attributes of the bread and wine in the Eucharist, to continue when their substance no longer exists. In like manner, according to the Lutheran doctrine, the attributes of the divine nature or essence are transferred to another essence. If there be no such transfer or communication, then the human nature of Christ is no more omniscient or almighty, than the worker of a miracle is omnipotent. If the divine nature only e”
CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 2, section 83: ut Deus, in omnibus creaturis sit.’” Yet this idea of the capacity of human nature for divinity became 411 the formative idea in the Lutheran doctrine of the person of Christ. No less diversity appears in the answer to the question, What is meant by the communication of natures? Sometimes it is said to be a communication of the essence of God to the human nature of Christ; sometimes a communication of divine attributes; and sometimes it is said to mean nothing more than that the human is made the organ of the divine. 325 325 Dorner says o”
CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 2, section 83: § 7 . Lutheran Doctrine. The Lutherans in their symbols adopt all the doctrinal decisions of the early Church respecting the person of Christ. They therefore hold, (1.) That Christ is very God and very man. (2.) That He has two distinct natures, a human and divine; that as to the latter He is consubstantial with the Father, and as to the former He is consubstantial with men. (3.) That He is one person. There is one Christ and not two. (4.) That the two natures are intimately united, but without confusion or change. Each nature retains its”
Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “NPNF1 Vol 2: Augustine — City of God, Christian Doctrine — CHAP. 6.--IN WHAT SENSE GOD IS INEFFABLE.: 6. Have I spoken of God, or uttered His praise, in any worthy way? Nay, I feel that I have done nothing more than desire to speak; and if I have said anything, it is not what I desired to say. How do I know this, except from the fact that God is unspeakable? But what I have said, if it had been unspeakable, could not have been spoken. And so God is not even to be called "unspeakable," because to say even this is to speak of Him. Thus there arises a curious contradiction of words, because if th”
CCEL (Reformed) “John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, section 50: Isiah 41:1, &c.; John 5:17 ; Luke 2:52 ; John 8:50 ; Mark 13:32 ; John 14:10 ; 6:38; Luke 24:39 . apply entirely to his humanity; since, as God, he cannot be in any respect said to grow, works always for himself, knows every thing, does all things after the counsel of his own will, and is incapable of being seen or handled. And yet he not merely ascribes these things separately to his human nature, but applies them to himself as suitable to his office of Mediator. There is a communication of ijdiwvmata, or properties, when Paul say”
Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “NPNF1 Vol 3: Augustine — On the Holy Trinity — CHAP. 5.--HOW DIFFICULT IT IS TO DEMONSTRATE THE TRINITY BY NATURAL REASON. (part 2): the same thing to say that He is living, and that He is intelligent, that is, in truth, wise. For He did not receive wisdom whereby to be wise, but He is Himself wisdom. And this is life, and again is power or might, and yet again beauty, whereby He is called powerful and beautiful. For what is more powerful and more beautiful than wisdom, "which reaches from end to end mightily, and sweetly disposes all things"?(5) Or do goodness, again, and righteousness, diffe”

Ask Your Own Question