Religious language Flashcards
What is via positiva?
Cataphatic way
It is possible to talk about what God is.
Which thinkers would agree with the cataphatic way?
Aquinas - cosmological argument
Anselm - ‘God is the greatest conceivable being’
Descartes - ‘God can do the logically impossible’
Examples in the bible of the cataphatic way?
‘God is loving’
‘God is just’
‘God is just’
Strengths of via positiva?
Words that describe what God is gives people hope.
It strengthens our relationship with God.
Weaknesses of via positiva?
We have never met God/ had a personal relationship with him, so how would we know what he is?
What is via negativa?
Apophatic way
It is only possible to talk about God by saying what he is not.
What does Pseudo Dionysius believe and which argument?
Via negativa
Since God is completely beyond our understanding, it means we cannot possibly talk about what he is.
What is a quote for Pseudo Dionysius?
God is ‘beyond every assertion’
‘there is no speaking of it’
What does Moses Maimonides believe and which argument?
Via negativa
Argues that religious language is meaningful when used negatively.
If you describe what a ship is not, you get closer understanding of what it is.
What does Brian Davies disagree with?
Disagrees with the apophatic way.
We are left with absolutely no understanding of what God is like if we use negatives.
‘We need to know before we start what the possibilities are’
Strengths of via negativa?
People will not make assumptions about what God is like.
Avoids interpreting God in a human-like way (anthropomorphising).
Only allows us to gain knowledge in certain cases eg. if we know the opposite.
Weaknesses of via negativa?
We are left with no absolute understanding of what God is like.
What does Aquinas believe about religious language?
God is beyond our understanding but we can use analogical language, so long as we accept that it is only an analogy.
What is the analogy of attribution?
We should use anlogies asthere is someconnction between God and humans.
We are able to attribute goodness to God because we see goodness in his creation.
How does Brian davies explain the analogy of attribution?
He uses the analogy of the baker - while the bread is not good in the same way that he baker is, we can attribute goodness to the skills of the baker.
What is the analogy of proportion?
When we talk about God being good, this is proportionally greater than he goodness of humans.
He therefore avoids using equivocal and univocal language.
How does Baron Von Hugel explain the analogy of proportion?
The faithfulness of a human is proportionally greater than the faithfulness of a dog.
Strengths of analogical way?
Avoids miscommunications with equivocal language.
Avoids anthropomorphising God.
Hick - we can know of God while preserving mystery.
Weaknesses of analogical way?
How do we know how much greater God is?
J Don Scotus - analogies are too vague and leave us unable to understand God.
How can we know anything about God if he is still beyond our understanding?
We may still limit God.
What are Tillich’s views on symbolic language?
A sign points to something outside of itself whereas a symbol participates in tha to which it points to.
He believes these symbols give meaning to people’s lives as they point towards the ‘ultimate concern’.
These symbols point to a truth that are only indirectly approached.
In which book did Tillich shares his views on symbolic language?
‘Systematic theology’
Quote for symbolic language pointing towards the ‘ultimate concern’?
‘symbolic language alone is able to express the ultimate…’
Which example from the bile would show how Jesus is symbolically represented?
‘Behold the Lamb of God who takes sin away from the world’
Symbolically shows how Jesus was the ultimate sacrifice for humanity.
Quote for Tillich’s views on symbols?
‘Representations of that which is unconditionally beyond the conceptual sphere’
Strengths of Tillich?
He does not anthropomorphisme God and understands that God is greater than us.
He understands that God cannot be understood literally.
Many people connect with something rather than being able to fully describe it.
Religious experiences can be ineffable and evoke more than literal meanings.
Humans have seeked the ‘ultimate concern’ throughout history.
What is Hick’s criticise of Tillich?
Suggests that philosophical language about God, such as him being necessary, is not symbolic.
He questions what the difference is between symbols participate in being and how everything else participates.
Participation is too vague.
What is Alston’s criticism of Tillich?
He argues that important doctrines, like heaven and hell, have to be taken factually and not literally.
What is Whitehead’s criticism of Tillich?
His view is overly abstract.
God as the ‘ground of being’ is too impersonal and detached from the concrete world.
What is the issue of literalism and symbolism?
Symbolic interpretation undermines the authority of religious texts.
This weakens the power of religious texts and rituals.
What is Barth’s criticism of Tillich?
He has a tendency to reduce God to something too anthropocentric.
Tillich allows for too much human subjectivity.
What is Derrida’s criticism of Tillich?
Religious symbols do not merely point beyond themselves to a transcendent reality, but are interpreted differently depending on the person using them.
What is Randall’s view on symbolic language?
All religious language is non-cognitive meaning there is never any objective reality.
Instead, religious is like art or music - it is simply a human endeavor.
