The incomprehensibility of the essence of God is unconditional, and not only for the human mind, but also for the angelic world, which in its spirituality is closer to God: "There is no one who would see or explain the essence of God and the nature of God. And not only none of the people, but also none of the angels. And even the six-winged Seraphim cover their faces with their wings from the abundance of radiance sent down from there" [1361].

Palamas' apophatic theology is closely connected with the doctrine of the essence and energies in God, which he developed in detail. All negative theology refers precisely to the essence, while the manifestations of God in the world, His "speeches," energies, and Old Testament theophanies, are accessible to our name. He writes: "The God-bearing Fathers say that in God there is something unknowable, that is, His essence; but something knowable, that is, everything that surrounds His essence, namely, goodness, wisdom, power, divinity, or majesty; it is that which Paul called invisible, but which is visible through the consideration of creatures" [1362]. "The essence of God is unconditionally unnameable, since it is completely incomprehensible to the mind; but it is named according to all Its energies, and there none of the names differs in its meaning from the other. For each of them and all of them express nothing except that which is in no way knowable" [1363]. "The essence of God is unconditionally unnameable, because it transcends the name; in the same way it is not participatory, for it transcends communion" [1364]. But this is not the absolute incomprehensibility of the Godhead. It is "incomprehensible and at the same time intelligible" [1365].

In this case, the image of the God-seer Moses, beloved by mystics, is a vivid example of what has been said. Palamas compares two theophanies, one to the God-seer Moses and the God-hater Jacob:

"Are there really two Gods: One, who has a face accessible to the vision of the saints, and the Other, whose face surpasses all vision? Away from such wickedness! The visible face of God (Gen. 2:10). XXXII, 30) is nothing but the energy and mercy of God, manifested as a worthy but invisible person (Exod. XXXIII, 20) He is called the nature of God, which is above all expression and vision. For, according to the Scriptures, no one stands before the face of the Lord (Jer. XXIII, 18) and saw or explained the nature of God" [1366].

Just as St. Basil (see above) noted that nothing that does not belong to God cannot be the essence of God, so St. Gregory Palamas explains this in some detail:

"How could incorruptibility, invisibility, and in general all negative or restrictive determinations, all together or each separately, be essence? That which is not this or that is not an essence is not this. In addition, the essence of God does not express, in accordance with the language of theologians, properties positively combined with God, although when it is necessary we use all these names; but the superessence of God remains completely unnameable" [1367].

Thus, God can be known only by what is around Him, by His actions.

"It is not from essence that energy is cognized, but from energy the existence of essence is cognized, but what it is is not known. Likewise, the existence of God, according to the teaching of theologians, is known not from essence, but from His providence. This is what distinguishes energy from essence, that knowledge is accomplished through energy, while what is known through it is essence" [1368].

The most striking example of such a "performance" of God is His creative energy, since He is the One Creator in the true sense of the word. "Positions, states, places, times, etc. not in the proper sense are used in a conversation about God, but in a figurative sense" (metaphorically). And 'creation' and 'action' can only be said in relation to God in the truest sense of these words" (1369). For man, if it is given to create, it is not from complete non-existence, which is why this cannot be compared with the creative act of God [1370]. From what has been said, it is clear that the possibility of knowing God is not taken away from man, but this knowledge of God is by no means intellectual. It can only be experiential, i.e., in the line of mystical revelations. The simplest way is to directly examine the created world, in which the invisible God, His power and Divinity, of which St. Paul speaks, becomes visible. Paul (Rom. I, 20). More difficult is the deepening into oneself, the purification of one's soul, ontological catharsis, i.e. the simplification of the soul and sobriety, or, what is the same thing, the ascent with the apostles to Tabor for an authentic experience of the Transfiguration [1371]. For the hesychast, the light of Tabor is the uncreated energy of God, different from His essence, the energy thanks to which the knowledge of God and communion with God becomes possible by experience, existentially.

Apophatics is not a prohibition to theologize, and it does not exclude the cataphatic method:

"Negative, apophatic theology does not contradict or deny cataphatic theology, but shows that positive expressions about God, being true and pious, are not for God what they are for us. Just as God has knowledge of what exists, so we also have some knowledge; but we know everything as beings and phenomena, whereas God does not know as beings and phenomena, for He knew this no less than before the existence of beings. Therefore, whoever says that God does not know things as beings does not contradict him who asserts that God knows things, and knows them precisely as beings. It may turn out that positive theology also acquires meaning from negative theology, as it is said that all knowledge deals with some object (subject), i.e., with that which is known, and knowledge of God does not speak of any object. This is the same as saying that God does not know things as beings, and does not have the knowledge of things that we have. In the same way, it can be said hyperbolically that God does not exist. But when one expresses oneself in such a way as to show that it is wrong to speak of God that He exists, it is clear that, using apophatic theology, not hyperbolically, but because of its imperfection, one comes to the conclusion that God never exists at all. This is already excessive impiety" [1372].

From what has been said, it is clear that the antinomies born in the apophatic method are not absurd.

"To assert one thing or the other, since both statements are true, is characteristic of every pious theologian, and to contradict oneself is characteristic of one who is completely devoid of reason" (1373).

These conflicts of reason and antinomy find their best resolution in the living liturgical experience of the Church. In theologies about the dogmas of faith, boundless distances are opened up and dizzying abysses are opened.