^{page 2 note 1} The word ‘divine’ can of course be used unambiguously when the context indicates clearly that ‘the divine x’ means ‘God's x’, as when one speaks of the divine love or the divine purpose. To apply ‘divine’ as an adjective to the deity would be to use it meaninglessly—as in the celebrated but vacuous pronouncement, ‘The divine is rightly so-called.’

^{page 4 note 1} This does not appear to be a true instance of paradox in the sense in which Baillie has defined the term, namely as ‘a self-contradictory statement’ (p. 110). (The formula is a condensation of the fuller definition which he quotes from Father Sergius Bulgakov, in which a paradox, or antinomy, is described as a statement which ‘simultaneously admits the truth of two contradictory, logically incompatible, but ontologically equally necessary assertions’ (pp. 108–9, quoting Bulgakov, , The Wisdom of God, p. 116 note))Google Scholar. That God created all things ex nihilo is not a self-contradictory statement; it does not contain within itself logically incompatible components. It is ‘paradoxical’ only in the sense that it is empirically unverifiable and therefore de fide.