Describing God in Human Terms

We find in the Bible what we call anthropomorphic language. What is anthropology? It’s the science of man: the Greek word for man, ánthro̱pos and the Greek word for form is morfí̱. And so, anthropomorphic simply means something that is in the form of man.

If I say to you that the cattle on a thousand hills are God’s, do you take that literally? Does that mean when the Bible says that the cattle on a thousand hills are God’s, that God is a great big rancher in the sky? So many head of livestock? You know that’s not what it means. What does it mean? It calls attention to God’s ownership, doesn’t it? But we don’t take it literally because we recognize in that very concrete image that we are involved with anthropomorphic language.

But what about when we speak about the omnipotence of God, or the infinity of God, or any of those terms that are very abstract and heavy theological terms? Have we moved beyond anthropomorphic language? No, not at all. We have become more abstract. We have become more technical. We’ve become more theological. But even the most technical language that we use in theology is still anthropomorphic. All of our language, whether it’s about God, or about trains, or about flowers is anthropomorphic language. You know why? Because we’re anthropoid, and we can never get beyond our humanness because the finite cannot contain the infinite. And the only language we have is finite language.

OK then, so does that mean we can never get beyond ourselves? No, because there is a point of contact between man and God. The Bible tells us that we are created in the image of God, so that there is some sense in which man is like God. That’s what makes it possible for communication to occur, because God has built it into creation. He does not make us little gods. We are not to be identified with God. But we are like God in some way, because we are created in His image and in His likeness. And that makes it possible for God to speak, to reveal Himself to us, not in His language, but in our language. He can talk to us. He can communicate to us in a way that we can understand—not comprehensively, not exhaustively, but meaningfully, significantly, and really.