The argument is made that naming God is never really naming God but only naming our understanding of God. To take our ideas of the divine and hold them as if they correspond to the reality of God is thus to construct a conceptual idol built from the materials of our mind.
Interpretation
The quote suggests that our names and concepts of God are merely reflections of our own understanding, not the true nature of the divine.
Peter Rollins emphasizes that when we name or define God, we are not capturing the essence of God itself, but rather articulating our limited interpretations and understandings. This action can lead to the creation of a 'conceptual idol', a representation that is inherently flawed and only reflective of our mental constructs rather than the ultimate reality of God.
In practice
In a philosophical discussion on the nature of divinity.
You think the end justifies the means, however vile. I tell you: the end is the means by which you achieve it. Today's step is tomorrow's life. Great ends cannot be attained by base means. You've proved that in all your social upheavals. The meanness and inhumanity of the means make you mean and inhuman and make the end unattainable.
Look in the mirror, and don't be tempted to equate transient domination with either intrinsic superiority or prospects for extended survival.
The moral nihilism of celebrity culture is played out on reality television shows, most of which encourage a dark voyeurism into other people's humiliation, pain, weakness, and betrayal.
A monk is a man who considers himself one with all men because he seems constantly to see himself in every man.
To keep the heart then, is carefully to preserve it from sin which disorders it; and maintain that spiritual and gracious frame, which fits it for a life of communion with God.
Too weird to live, and too rare to die.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.