Introduction

Question 1

Some philosophers have argued that religious ?-? (“God exists” and “God is love”) are neither true nor false but meaningless.

Answer 1

Truth-claims.

Question 2

We can only discuss statements that mean something, and according to some thinker, ? ? lack any kind of meaning at all.

Answer 2

Religious statements.

Question 3

The ? ? posed a challenge to religious believers by suggesting that, if language is to be meaningful, its claims have to be capable of being tested using the ? ?, which ? suggested.

Answer 3

Logical positivists.
Five senses.
Ayer.

Question 4

Many philosophers contributed, offering various different understandings of how the claims made by religious believers might be understood, discussing whether they were talking about ? or whether the ? should be understood in different ways, drawing ? about whether religious language meant anything at all.

Answer 4

Facts.
Claims.
Conclusions.

Question 5

Philosophical discussion about meaning often identifies two different ways in which a word or phrase might mean something:

• ? is when the word stands for something, as a label for it.
• ? is when the word carries other associations with it.

Answer 5

Denotation.

Connotation.

Question 6

When we make ?-?, asserting that we’re stating a fact, then we’re speaking ?

Answer 6

Truth-claims.

Cognitively.

Question 7

?-? language can’t be determined either true or false (‘“Happy Birthday”).

Answer 7

Non-cognitive.

Question 8

There’s the question of whether people, when making religious ?-?, intend them to be understood as ?, ? statements (“God created the heavens and the earth”).

Answer 8

Truth-claims.
Denotative.
Cognitive.

Question 9

There’s also the question of whether, logically, the ?-? of religious language can be considered true or false, regardless of what the speaker or writer may’ve intended.

Answer 9

Truth-claims.