religious language I Flashcards
who proposed the cataphatic way?
aquinas
what does the cataphatic way mean?
speaking of God in the positive, via positiva
what is the dilemma with speaking about God?
- How can we, finite beings, speak on someone that is infinite and beyond human comprehension in a way that doesn’t transpose a false image of God
- we risk anthropomorphising God
what are the types of language?
univocal
equivocal
analogical
what is univocal?
it is unambiguous has one possible meaning
what is equivocal?
ambiguous - more than one interpretation
what is anological language?
a comparison between two things
why did Aquinas reject univocal language as way for discussing God?
because if you say God is good this does not mean God is good in the same way a human being is Good. Good is a fixed word to describe human behaviour.
why did Aquinas reject equivocal language as way for discussing God?
an equivocal approach to God would undermine religious practices. Any demonstration about God would be formally invalid, as it would include an equivocation. Any communication about God would be severely limited because we cannot make any affirmative claims about God or his nature
for aquinas what language is the only way we can speak about God?
analogical
what are the two types of analogies ?
attribution
proportion
what is analogy of attribution?
we can say something about a creator or author from the product. Hence, we know God from their creation, Earth. Much like, a loaf of bread tells us about the baker.
what is analogy of proportion?
- a quality of something is proportional to its nature
- when we describe God as loving we mean all loving becuase this is proportional to his divine being, he is not loving in the same way a human is loving
- we can know God from humans in greater degree
what does brummer say about analogies?
brummer points out that analogies give the appearance of being helpful but we remain ignorant. We are still making assumptions of Gods nature.
what did swinburne say about analogical language?
Aquinas rejects the literal meaning of words as being applicable to God. Richard Swinburne has suggested that sometimes words could be used univocally to talk about God. For example, if God is good, this could be interpreted to mean that God is good just as human beings can be, but God is good to a greater degree.
what might barth say about analogies?
it is dangerous to rely on human nature to understand gods nature
post-lapersian theology demonstrates that human reason is flawed after the fall
who said we can speak of God using symbols?
Paull Tillich
For tillich is RL cognitive?
Religious language doesn’t have objective meaning since our language cannot directly refer to God who is so beyond our finite understanding of the world.
for tillich what is the meaning of RL?
connection to God through its symbol to the individual
Example of a religious symbol
crucifix
dove
shephard
rock
How do Christians respond to the crucifix?
Crucifix doesn’t have objective meaning but it inspires meaning to the Christian through functioning symbolically for Jesus and his sacrifice for sin.
What is the difference between a sign and a symbol?
A sign attaches a label but a symbol participates in what it points to.