If God Is Unknowable, How Is God Known?

Here is where a problem arises. If God is unknowable, then how do we know God? It is interesting, because within the Christian tradition the first person really to deal with this issue — there is probably Tertullian, of whom one might have some inklings, but the first person really to deal with it — is probably Kierkegaard, who is a very interesting philosopher, because Kierkegaard suddenly recognises that with the knowability of God there is definitely a problem there. The way the Christians have tended to deal with that is through Christ. Christ becomes the object of God's knowability. God becomes man so that man can understand God. This is an element within Christian theology.

For the Muslim, the knowability of God is through the creation itself. And this is why much of the Qurʾān is focused on telling people to explore the creation itself, because the creation is seen as a theatre of manifestation, of divine manifestation. God is not entering in, is not incorporated, is not becoming — not embodying Himself into the creation, as incarnation is becoming the flesh. And likewise, what Montgomery Watt would like to suggest is that somehow God has imbibliated Himself: nice, fancy PhD work — that God became book. Which is not true. The Muslims do not look at it that way, even though they do believe that the Qurʾān is an attribute of God. This Qurʾān that is here in our hands — it is not said that this is God on earth, or something like that. No. Although it is believed that the Qurʾān is the speech of God, and it is believed to be the uncreated speech of God: the eternal meanings that move into the vehicle of language. The intentions of God — that is the speech of God.