The Only Foundation of True Theology: Archetypal and Ectypal Theology With the Use of Analogy – Part I

I. Introduction

Anyone can remember when they thought one thing about a person, be it good or ill, and, after hearing something new about them, drastically changed how they thought about them. You may think a person is nice, when they are double-faced. You may think someone is selfishly aloof, when they serve people without recognition by most. How differently do you think the apostles viewed Jesus when they started to realize the Son of Man is God the Son than when they first followed him? Theologians, which all believers are, are prone to a jaded view of God, seeing Him not as the immense God of glory, but as an exceptionally large man. Volumes could fill all the tragedies that occur from such thinking. Rather than thinking of God as merely bigger and better than man, the Christian theologian must understand who he is and what God is as holy, absolute, and distinct from creation¹.

This essay addresses how to properly distinguish between what God knows because of who He is, and what man may know because of who God is and how he reveals himself. Theologians have historically explained this distinction in terms of archetypal and ectypal theology. In this vein, Archetypal and Ectypal distinctions are necessary in theology to know the true God, without disruption of the creator creature relation or distinction.  This means that the language we use concerning God is analogical, rather than univocal or equivocal.  After defining terms, this essay will argue that there is a Gap between God’s theology and man’s, that it is good and must be maintained, and that it must be bridged to know God.  I seek to show that a man’s ectypal theology is an image of God’s archetypal theology, which is made know to image-bearers in revelation by analogical knowledge of divine matters. 

II. Definitions 

Before going on long road trips, it is wise to examine the integrity of the vehicle, check the oil, fill it with gas, and listen for any irregular sounds. The same thing is true in understanding the language that we use to speak about God. It is important to begin by defining some key terms that are relevant to this subject. 

Archetypal theology 

Archetypal Theology is unknowable by man. That is because “Archetypal theology is the divine wisdom of divine matters,”² which, with God as both subject and object, we cannot comprehend nor apprehend. William Ames wrote, “God, as he is in himself, cannot be understood by any save himself.”³ It is here that the theologian speaks about what he does not know himself but knows to be true.  

God is the one who is archetypal theology; it is how he knows Himself and all things in relation to himself. Why is this important? The apostle Paul wrote, “there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things.” (1 Cor 8:6) Paul profoundly knew that our theology, along with all things, must come from God. Thus, theology comes from God’s knowledge of Himself, as all things come from God. Theology has its origin in God, who is the fount of all knowledge. Zophar’s true statement implies that archetypal theology impossible for man: “Can you search out the deep things of God? Can you find out the limits of the Almighty? They are higher than heaven—what can you do? Deeper than Sheol—what can you know? Their measure is longer than the earth and broader than the sea” (Job 11:7). Man, according to Job, cannot know God as God knows God. This is what makes archetypal theology important. For a man to know God, he must know God as creature rather than as Creator.⁴  Paul again wrote, “who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct Him” (1 Cor 2:16). Fundamentally, man cannot know divine wisdom divinely; if he did, then he would have grounds to instruct the grand architect of creation, as his equal, which cannot be. The question then arises, how can human beings do theology?

Ectypal theology 

Ectypal theology has the same object as Archetypal theology, namely God, but it differs in subject. As Archetypal theology concerns the divine matters, so does ectypal theology. They together aim at wisdom through the true knowledge of the true God, which is better than much gold (Proverbs 16:16). Revelation is necessary for Ectypal theology. The book of Proverbs is pregnant with the theme of increasing in wisdom. “For the LORD gives wisdom; from His mouth come knowledge and understanding” (Proverbs 2:6), “For whoever finds me (Wisdom) finds life, and obtains favor from the Lord” (Proverbs 8:35), “When pride comes, then comes shame; But with the humble is wisdom” (proverbs 11:2).  In all these texts, and throughout the Old and New Testament, we find the assumption that man can increase in wisdom. I remember being a youth at a church camp where the pastor was teaching on proverbs. He told the high schoolers that all men started as fools, but some were “class A fools,” and others were “class B fools.” A “class A fool” was a fool who rejected God and did not increase in wisdom. A “class B fool,” although starting in foolishness, through laying hold of Christ, does increase in wisdom. Isaiah gives us the same picture in his second chapter: “Many people shall come and say, “come, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; He will teach us His ways, and we shall walk in His paths,” he then argues that this increase comes from the “word of the Lord” (Isaiah 2:3). Ectypal theology is man’s knowledge of God, as God’s image renewed by the Spirit of Christ, based on God’s self-revelation (this is addressed in section VI).

Univocal Language

Univocality is used to describe complete similarity. It means “one voice,” and some use univocal language to describe how (they conceive) theology is done. For a term to be univocal would mean it has only one meaning. This would be the idea that God and man know theology in exactly the same way.⁵  

Equivocal Language

Equivocality, in theology, describes complete dissimilarity in man’s and God’s knowledge of theology. Equivocal language describes two different things using the same term, though having no relationship of meaning. In this understanding, there is God’s theology and man’s theology, and there is are no commonalities between them. An equivocal understanding of holiness would say that the holiness we experience in Christ has no likeness to the Holy God Himself. Equivocal language ends in mysticism because it makes God’s thoughts and man’s thoughts distinct with no relation and therefore not rational.  This essay’s scope will not verge on such territory, but it is helpful to know that equivocal language in theology exists.⁶

Analogical Language

Analogical language refers to understanding true derivative knowledge through divine revelation, but with some adjectival (qualitative) differences between God’s self-knowledge and our knowledge of God. This does not mean that we understand theology by metaphors to the exclusion of propositional statements, but it means that all thoughts, words, propositions, and metaphors about God fall short of his glory. Our knowledge of God is an “echo and reflection of the original,”⁷ and no creature cannot reflect back to God with radiance to match his glory. When compared to God, any knowledge we obtain is qualitatively dim. We do not merely have less knowledge than God does, nor do we have no knowledge of God at all, but we have true knowledge of God using terms that bear some analogy to what he is in himself. Using analogical language, the theologian can describe how we know God truly and from a creaturely perspective.