In a recent work by a Catholic that, in part, seeks to defend the Trinity (largely against Oneness Pentecostals), there is the following that affirms that, in some real sense, people have, and can, “see” God, albeit in a limited way (and, in this instance, within a Trinitarian framework, so of course, caveat lector):
Surely it is not possible for us to comprehend the nature of God. Consequently, the Bible speaks of our inability to “see” God (e.g., John 1:18; 1 Tim. 6:16). On the other hand, some individuals are privileged to “see” God, at least in a “dark cloud” or by way of some visible appearance that God may temporarily assume, sometimes called a theophany. To complicate matters further, our heavenly hope is to “see God” (Matt. 5:8). If we seek to harmonize these various ideas, we are pushed to grant that, in some meaningful sense, humans have been given insight into God’s nature but that this insight must be qualified as far short of a full grasp of the infinite God. Our hope is that the limited knowledge we now have of God will be far surpassed in the life to come. In light of these distinctions, it is possible to say some men have “seen” (i.e., partial insight) God but, at the same time, none have “seen” (i.e., full comprehension) God. (Mark A. McNeil, All in the Name: How the Bible Led Me to Faith in the Trinity and the Catholic Church [El Cajon, Calif.: Catholic Answers Press, 2018], 42-43, italics in original)
