Religious Language

What does the Apophatic Way suggest?

claims that because words are unable to adequately describe God, the only possible statements that can be made are negative statements; statements about what God is not

How is God ‘beyond description’?

beyond our ability to describe

• Judaism: name of God is not uttered

• Islam: picturing God is forbidden

How does the Apophatic Way successfully acknowledge that God is ‘beyond description’?

Via negitiva is aware that the danger of using human language of God is that we will imagine or picture

• when we say ‘God is Good’ - we cannot help but understand ‘good’ in terms of human language → God’s goodness is beyond our comprehension

• all words when applied to God are equivocal

Where did the Apophatic Way initially come from?

Platonic philosophers - realised that the form of the Good was beyond description

What did Pseudo-Dionysius believe?

God was beyond assertion

• influenced by Plato

• aware of the limits of our senses as well as our language

What does Pseudo-Dionysius say about making positive statements about God would be a risk to?

Anthropomorphic (tendency to describe something in human terms) idea of God

• only negative terms of God can preserve his mystery

What did Maimonidies argue about the use of Via Negativa in his Guide for the Preplexed?

• only positive statements can be made is that God exists

• all other descriptions of God must be negative to ensure that we are not being improper or disrespectful

• negative language can bring us some knowledge of God

What is Maimonidies example of the Ship?

If we say that the ship is not an accident, not a mineral, not a plant, not a natural body, etc, then he argues that by the tenth statement we will have some knowledge about what the ship is

• similarly, via negativia allows us to gain some knowledge of God

What is Eriugena’s famous quote about God?

“God is beyond all meaning and intelligence, and he alone possesses immorality. His light is called darkness because of its excellence, as no create can comprehend either what or how it is”

What are the strengths of the Apophatic way?

• via negitiva is true to God’s transcendence and otherness

• via negitiva helps us to understand God’s immanence

How does Otto strengthen the idea of God’s transcendence and otherness?

called God “wholly other”

• radically different to anything else we experience of understand

How does Exodus strengthen the idea of God’s transcendence and otherness?

states that God appears to Moses as a cloud instead of His true form as His true form would have been too immense for Moses to handle

How does Augustine strengthen the idea of God’s transcendence and otherness?

comments that whatever we can comprehend is not God

How does Maimonides strengthen our understanding of God’s immanence?

seemingly possible descriptions of God in the Bible should be interpreted as His immanence. Once distinguishing:

• transcendence: God’s actual but unknowable being which can only be described negatively

• immanence: God’s actions in the physical world, which can be described positively, since God’s unknowable being/nature is not being described - this is what all biblical language about God is argued as referring to

How is the Apophatic Way successful?

Any language that is used about God is inevitably pictured by its hearers in human terms - reduces God to a human level

• apophatic way prevents anthropomorphic way prevents anthropomorphic representations of God

How could the Apophatic Way be described as respectful?

Its approach recognises that God is transcendent and wholly other to the human realm

• fits with how religious experiences are perceived by those who experience them (mysticism)

• William James observes religious experiences as ineffable; cannot be described by ordinary language

What are the weaknesses of the Apophatic Way?

Bible describes God in positive terms

• descriptions of God as having a ‘face’ or ‘walking’ in the Garden of Eden - cannot be dismissed as metaphorical language, or perhaps just referring to God’s immanent actions

There are Bible passages which seem to describe God’s nature itself that seems difficult for Maimonides’ argument to explain

How is God described in John’s Gospel?

Positively - “God is love” and “God is spirit”

• God describes himself in positive terms in Exodus 20:5 “I, the Lord your God, I am a jealous God”

How is God’s description in the Gospel a weakness for the Apophatic Way?

Bible seems to suggest that via positiva language about God is valid - via negativa approach appears to conflict with the religious language in the Bible

• all scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in his righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work (2 Timothy)

How is the Apophatic Way limited in knowing God?

Incredibly limited in what can be known

• unclear from Maimonidies example that a ship can be described in the way he maintains - less likely that this method can bring any knowledge for God

How is the Apophatic Way unsuccessful?

• not a true reflection of how religious believers speak or think about God

• means that the believe has no means of communicating with the non-believer about the subject of God

How does Inge criticise the Apophatic Way?

Argued that denying any description to God leads to an annihilation of God where we potentially lose the connection between God and the World

• Flew’s argument on falsification would seems to support this view - idea of a God who is not visible, it is intangible, etc… seems to bear very little difference to there being no God at all

What is the Cataphatic Way?

Idea that God can be spoken of in positive terms

What did Aquinas argue on Analogy?

argues that language applied to God is not literal but is analogical

• analogies are used in everyday speech to help people understand something they are unfamiliar with, by comparing it with something they are familiar with

What is the Analogy of Attribution?

the words that we apply the human beings are related to how words are applied to God because there is a casual relationship between two sets of qualities

• qualities such as love and wisdom are reflections of those of God (St Catherine of Siena also suggests this)

e.g. Bull Analogy

What is the Bull Analogy?

In medieval times, it was believed that if a creature’s urine was healthy then the creature that produced the urine must also be healthy; “if the urine is good, then the bull is good”

• the bull is the cause of the urine!

What does the Bull Analogy suggest?

By examining human life, wisdom or power we may see a pale reflection of these divine attributes

What is the Analogy of Proper Proportion?

a being has a quality in a degree relative to its being

• e.g. virus has life, plants have life, humans have life, God has life - illustrates that different being have a quality of life to different degrees in proportion to their being

What does the Analogy of Proper Proportion suggest?

God is the greatest being and thus has qualities to a greater degree of proportion than humans

• thus, we can now add to our statement that God has qualities analogous to ours that he has them in a greater proportion

God’s love/knowledge/power is like ours but proportionally greater

What is Aquinas’ natural theology?

view that human reason is capable of knowing something of God

• what his qualities are analogous to

How does Aquinas’ natural theology strengthen his argument?

Accepted that human reason could never know or understand God’s infinite divine nature

• however, argued that human reason can gain lesser knowledge of God, including God’s nature by analogy, through the analogies of attribution and proportion

Concluded that we can meaningfully talk about God’s qualities by analogy

How does Aquinas’ natural theology weaken his argument?

places a dangerous overreliance on human reason

• our finite minds cannot grasp God’s infinite being! - whatever humans discover through reason is not divine: to think it is divine is idolatry

• after corruption of the fall, human reason cannot teach God or God’s morality - not our telos, any faith in God’s revelation in the Bible is valid

What does Barth say about human’s finite minds?

“the finite has no capacity for the infinite”

How does Hick successfully develop Aquinas’ analogy?

Develops Aquinas’ example of analogy of Proper Proportion using the example of the term ‘faithfulness’

• just as we see a dog’s faithfulness as smaller or more limited than human faithfulness - faithfulness is vastly smaller when compared to the faithfulness of God

What are the two key errors in religious language that the Cataphatic Way avoids?

• it is not univocal so avoids speaking anthropomorphically

• it is not equivocal so avoids the agnosticism that comes with this approach

What is a strength of Aquinas’ Analogy?

Invites us to describe God in visual terms - not dissimilar to the method that Jesus used when describing the kingdom of God

• ‘Kingdom of God is like...’ parables

How is partiality a issue with the Cataphatic Way?

not always easy to know how far that meaning is stretched - circular

• analogy tell us that ‘God is love’, not truly the same as human love, but is not completely different

How can the Cataphatic Way lead to the danger of ‘picturing’?

danger of ‘picturing’ an aspect of God we are interpreting on an individual level

• ‘God is my Shepherd’ may be imagined and understood differently by different people

Why are some critics concerned with the Cataphatic Way and language?

in order to understand the word that is being applied to God - we have to translate that word into univocal language first

How does Swinburne criticise the Cataphatic Way?

Religious statements are not analogical, but univocal

• meaning remains in contrast with the everyday meaning but is stretched

What does Tillich argue about Religious Language?

Religious Statements are not literally true

• almost all religious language that attempts to express ideas about God is to be understood symbolically

• we can only speak about God/religion symbolically

What is a Sign?

e.g. red traffic light to another road sign that points to something

What is a Symbol?

participates in that to which it points

• a flag does not merely act as a sign; for many people it represents the nation involved

What is a common Christian symbol?

Cross

• not just these objects or events that represent truthful statements including literal sounding statements (e.g. “God is good”) are to be understood symbolically

What is Tillich saying when he states that: we cannot speak literally of God?

not apart of the empirical world and so can’t be represented by literal language

• only statements that can be used of God is the ‘Ground of being’ or the ‘Being itself’ - the source of everything

all other statements should be understood symbolically

What is Tillich saying when he states that: symbolic words we ascribe to God cannot be random or invented?

(influenced by Jung) - they may emerge out of a collective unconscious

• certainty symbols function on an unconscious level as much as a conscious level

What is Tillich saying when he states that: symbols may have a limited life span?

e.g. Hindu symbol of the Swastika - lost its meaning due to Nazi use

• words we use to describe God may change overtime as some words and pictures become more helpful or unhelpful

What is Tillich saying when he states that: a symbol opens up levels of reality that would otherwise be closed to us?

didn’t unlock ‘hidden depths of our own being’

• Analogy of Art - like art, symbols enable us to grasp deep truths about the world and about ourselves

What quote does Tillich say?

“Every symbol is double edged. It opens up reality and it opens the soul”

What is Ramsey’s view of models and qualifiers?

(development of Ramsey’s theory)

we may design a model to help us understand something, like religious language is a model to help us understand God

• also have qualifiers with them; these are words that show us how to use the model or specify under what conditions that model may apply

How is Ramsey’s view of models and qualifiers applied to the phrase ‘Heavenly Father’?

• the word ‘Father’ is a model that helps us to understand the concept of God

• the word ‘Heavenly’ is a qualifier; we must not understand God as an earthly father, he is a different kind of father

What are the strengths of Symbolic Language?

• preserves the transcendence and mystery of God in a way that analogical language does not

• can be changed with time - ensures that the message remains relevant to its changing cultural context

What is Tillich’s insight of why Symbolic Language is successful?

Symbols are able to communicate deeply in a way that ordinary language cannot

• accurately reflects our sense that most important things in life are beyond words (ineffable)

How does J.H. Randall criticise Symbolic Language?

Happy to accept that religious language is symbolic, but believes that the symbols are non-cognitive and provide no information about God

How does Alshon criticise Symbolic Language?

Objects that religious language must involve facts

• “there is not point in trying to determine whether the statement is true or false”

How does Hick criticise Symbolic Language?

Philosophical language about God is not symbolic

What is a Christian criticism of Symbolic Language?

Some beliefs in Christianity are taken as facts - reducing statements about these beliefs to ‘symbolic’ may not be a true Christian belief

How can Symbolic Language be criticised as vague?

it is unclear how a symbol participates in that to which it points

• to burn a flag might be seen as an insult, but would it really weaken the nation?