Religious Language

Question 1

via negativa

Pseudo-dionysius (apophatic)

Answer 1

only meaningful way to talk about God is by saying what he is not
‘God is not Darkness’ - not saying god is light it is saying that God is beyond the concept of light and dark
accepting that we cannot meaningfully talk about God through positive language brings us closer to ‘unity’ with him

Question 2

Maimonides

Answer 2

uses illustration of a ship
continuously describing what a ship is not brings us closer to the understanding of what a ship is - same with God

Question 3

Brian Davis criticism of maimonides

Answer 3

can’t compare a ship to God
negative language only works in ‘specisl cases’ where we know the possibilities e.g. if we are told someone is not left-handed or can use both hands then we know they are right-handed

Question 4

Aquinas criticism of Via Negativa

Answer 4

When christians talk about God they do not want to say what he is not
biblical language is positive e.g. ‘God is love’

Question 5

Aquinas theory of analogy (cataphatic)

Answer 5

we can’t use univocal language as we are not the same as God and we can’t use equivicol language as we are not entirely different so middle ground to meaningfully talk about God is to say what he is like analogously
we achieve the knowledge of these analogys through reason and natural law
analogy of proportion and analogy of attribution