The Apophatic Way, Or Via Negativa, As A Way Of Speaking About God Flashcards
If people speak of God as a “?” or a “?”, these are words that make us think of human judges and human fathers.
Judge.
Father.
Some writers argued that whatever normal language we use when we try to ? God, we’re always going to make God too small and argued that it’s only possible to speak about God properly if we use ? terms, and talk about what God isn’t (? ?).
Describe.
Negative.
Via Negativa.
Those in favour of the via negativa argue that descriptions of God are statements of ?
Fact.
As soon as we try to speak of God in ? terms and suggest that God has attributes that we recognise from the physical world, we start making ? that are so inaccurate that they damage understanding.
Positive.
Statements.
Pseudo-Dionysius was an influential figure in the development of the ? ?
Apophatic way.
Pseudo-Dionysius argued that the via negativa is the only way in which we ca speak ? about God, as God’s beyond all human ? and imagination.
Truthfully.
Understanding.
Dionysius was a follower of ?, believing in the division between the physical body and spiritual soul, believing that the soul’s search for ? can be held back by the demands of the body and the mind’s desire for complete ?
Plato.
God.
Understanding.
It’s only through ? of the limits of ? that spiritual progress can be made.
Recognition.
Humanity.
Maimonides thought the best way to convey an ? understanding of the ? of God was to explain what God isn’t.
Accurate.
Nature.
The via negativa uses only ? terms to speak of God, as a way of avoiding belittling God by attributing human ? to him.
Negative.
Qualities.
Although ? don’t believe in God, they still use the ? ? to try to convey the essence of ultimate reality.
Buddhists.
Via Negativa.
