Religious Language: Negative, Analogical or Symbolic

Question 1

Discussing RL

Answer 1

“God talk”

can we really use our language to talk about about if he is so different from us?

Question 2

cognitive statements

Answer 2

statements that can be either true or false

Question 3

non-cognitive statements

Answer 3

a statement that cannot be deemed as either true or false.

Question 4

Richard dawkins

Answer 4

religious statements are cognitive and false

Question 5

religious believers

Answer 5

religious statements are cognitive and true

Question 6

apophatic way/ via negativa

Answer 6

a way of religious language
it is a process of negation - we should talk about what god is not.
it is not possible to talk about what god is because he is far beyond our understanding and this leads to misinterpretations as he is different from anything else.

Question 7

mysticism

Answer 7

we have to erase our human understanding of what God is, so that we can find out what he isn’t.

Question 8

Plotinus

Answer 8

the mind can only approach God through imageless and apophatic meditation. god is beyond description and language.

Question 9

meister Eckhart

Answer 9

“the cloud of unknowing”

Question 10

moses Maimonides

Answer 10

denying every attribute applied to God brings you one step closer to God.
speaking of God using human language poses a danger of anthropomorphism

Question 11

pseudo dionysuis

Answer 11

language becomes restrictive as thought becomes more complex.
language cannot be descriptive of God as he is the most complex thing so is far beyond it.
you must only talk of god negatively - descriptions of god are evocative, instrumental and non-cognitive.

Question 12

via negativa procedure

Answer 12

start with assertions about the lowerst of creatures
whatever we can same about them positively, we must deny him of these attributes.
through progressive denials you ascend into the divine realm.

Question 13

Aquinas

Answer 13

“the first cause surpasses human understanding and speech”
we are more accurate when we say god is not something than when we say he is something.
the essence of God is beyond our human understanding

Question 14

general criticisms of the via negativa

Answer 14

“God is not a bicycle” unhelpful!
HOWEVER we do know that he is not physical, which does tell us something about him.
why shouldn’t we use anthropomorphic language when God became flesh?
The bible speaks of God descriptively.
We will never have a full understand of God but we do have a wide range of language so why shouldn’t we use it to get as close as possible?
if the truth cannot be spoken then why are we bothering to speak about it at all?
VN ends up saying nothing about God.

Question 15

W.R. Inge

Answer 15

Denying God his descriptions would lead to the annihilation of both God and humanity.
we lose the essential link between us and God.
if we cant speak about him positively we wont speak about him at all.

Question 16

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

Answer 16

Finding God through our material existence was part of his divine plan. Talking about God through the love we experience as humans says something positive about God.

Question 17

Via positive - cataphatic way

Answer 17

we can and SHOULD talk about God positively

this does not mean we are accurate, we are still limited

Question 18

Both approaches

Answer 18

used by eastern churches. the aim of life is theosis (unity with God)
mystical contemplation helps worshippers move towards a greater understanding of God. they use a limited positive approach + via negativa. (our language is used to express encounters with God)

Question 19

strengths of via negativa

Answer 19

human concepts of images of the divine are inadequate.
god is beyond human signs and language.
positive talk of god limits him
anthropomorphism reduces god to human terms.
enables understanding of equivocal language

Question 20

david hume

Answer 20

“all desriptions of God fall into the danger of anthropomorphism”

Question 21

analogy

Answer 21

comparison between 2 different things

Question 22

Aquinas and analogy

Answer 22

we can speak analogically of god because he is the cause (creator) of all things.
god is good because he is the cause of all goodness, which is mirrored imperfectly in his creation.
humans understand that words have different meanings when we apply them to god.
positive things can be said about god.

Question 23

Aquinas on equivocal language

Answer 23

he rejected it.
it conveys no information about god, only that he is different to us.
it takes the objective meaning away from words such as love.

Question 24

analogy of attribution

Answer 24

when a term, originally used with reference to one thing is applied to a second thing because one causes another.
e.g. humans wisdom is a reflection of gods wisdom

Question 25

analogy of proportionality

Answer 25

when a word is employed to refer to a quality that a thing possesses. humans have an experience of God’s power, it is proportionality less than god’s omnipotence but it allows us to have an understanding of it.

Question 26

ian ramsey

Answer 26

good is a model - it helps us to understand God’s goodness

models are qualified - whatever our goodness is, gods is infinitely greater.

Question 27

remotion and excellence

Answer 27

we need to remove our imperfections from our model to understand his excellence.

Question 28

c.brown

Answer 28

god has revealed himself in action, thought and word. it is appropriate and meaningful to express God analogically.

Question 29

problems with analogy

Answer 29

it presupposes the existence of god.
god is beyond all human understanding so we cannot use him for comparisons.
it lacks a clear understanding of god
analogy is proportionality is only meaningful is both terms are known - we do not know god so it is pointless.

Question 30

symbol

Answer 30

something which stands for something else.

they communicate something much more powerful, helping us towards a greater understanding of God.

Question 31

w.stephens

Answer 31

“we do not live in the world but a picture of it”

Question 32

p.tillich

Answer 32

words are more than a some of their parts
symbolic language demonstrates god as “being itself” - meaning ‘all that is’.
god talk is symbolic and cannot be translated into literal assertions.
symbols help us look beyond the world towards the ultimate reality.
it opens up new levels of reality, transcends facts and ‘unlocks dimensions and elements of the soul’.

Question 33

j.r.randall

Answer 33

RL stirs emotions and binds communities together.

Question 34

erkia dinker-von Schubert

Answer 34

symbol expresses what is beyond rational recognition. it distinguishes humans and animals.

Question 35

p.Edwards

Answer 35

criticises symbol.
they do not convey factual information and are therefore meaningless.
they cant be verified using sense experience.

Question 36

criticisms of symbol

Answer 36

they are culturally determined and can be misleading.
they are superficial, inadequate and inappropriate.
subjective
trivialised e.g. jewellery