RE Philosophy - Religious Language 1 (Symbolic Language)

What does the word ‘Sign’ mean from Tillich’s view?

• Sign: Points us towards something else.

What does the word ‘Symbol’ mean from Tillich’s view?

• Symbol: ‘participates’ in that to which it points.

Who was Paul Tillich (1886-1965)?

• German-American Luthern theologian.

• Best known for Systematic Theology.

• Focused on Symbollic religious language.

What is the difference between signs and symbols, according to Tillich?

• Sign is merely conventional - e.g. road sign may indicate hazards or blend in the road. We can quicly learn the meaning behind these signs.

• Symbols point towards something and participants in that which it points to. E.g. USA flag. Without the flag, the reality of the country would be different, as the flag pariticipates in it.

Can language be seen as a Symbol according to Tillich?

A symbol is:

• Something that represents something else.

• Powerful.

• Communicate profound significance.

• Points beyond itself.

• Evoke participation in this meaning.

• Don’t give content.

• Novak: symbols are arrows in the dark - shot towards God - fall back to earth before they reach God.

How is can God talk be thought to be Symbolic according to Paul Tillich? (1)

‘Nothing less than symbols or myths can express our ultimate concerns’-

• Symbols can express what is of ultimate concern - words, as normally used, can’t.

• Religious language is symbolic as ‘opens up’ new levels of reality.

• Symbols go beyond external word ~ ‘internal reality’.

• Tillich: Symbols ‘open up levels of reality which otherwise are closed to us’ and ‘unlocks dimensions & elements of our soul’.

How is can God talk be thought to be Symbolic according to Paul Tillich? (2)

• Symbols ‘participate’ in the thing they point us towards.

• Crucifix symbol of significance of Jesus’ death, it participates in that specific event.

• ‘Participates’ = represents the event and gives us access to a deeper level of understanding.

• Tillich explains this using MUSIC - different level of communication other than words. It can capture the mood of a moment as well as communicating beliefs and feelings.

How is can God talk be thought to be Symbolic according to Paul Tillich? (3)

• Stress on ‘participatory’ nature of symbols - part of their power!

• Symbols aren’t arbitary (random)!

• Symbols have a life-span. Their power diminshes when meaning of word changes over time - unable then to direct us to what ‘concerns us ultimately’. E.g. symbol of Mary as the Holy Virgin.

How is can God talk be thought to be Symbolic according to Paul Tillich? (4)

• God-talk is not literal.

• All religious language is symbolic - even if it doesn’t appear to be!

• Our idea of God needs retranslation.

• E.g. God can be described as a person (God as the ‘ground of our being’) - but He is not a person, can’t be known in a personal way.

• Symbolic language can be true - can’t be falsified.

• Symbols can’t be destroyed - unless the situation when tey were created has passed.

• E.g. symbol of Mary as the Holy Virgin - Protestants.

• No symbol should become an idol.

What does Tillich mean by ‘God is Love’?

• If I say ‘God is love’, then that utterance is not merely a sign of what God is, but is a participation in the reality of God. To use the sentence is to participate, to be part of God.

• Tillich adds the term can be both affirmed or negated.

• AFFIRMED because God really is love.

• NEGATED because the human term is so utterly inadequate as a description of God. To see the symbo as participating in God is also to acknowledge is limitations.

What is Tillich’s view on Religious Language?

• Symbol from Tillich could be classed as apophatic, cataphatic, or both. Why?

• He wants to use positive language that say something we can related to about God while recognising that God is far beyoind any words a human could use.

• Therefore, he argues that Symbolic language is both affirmed and negated by that to which it point.

How can the use of Symbolic language be useful to talk about God?

• Preserves God’s mystery - avoids anthromorphism - whilst communicating something deeper than words themselves.

• It allows us to say something - unlike the apophatic way.

• The fact that symbolic language can change over time could be an advantage because it can remain relevant to the culture/time.

• Tillich see RL as cognitive because it expresses something about the ultimate, the true reality.

How can Symbolic Language is not useful to talk about God?

• Hick - what does it mean to ‘participate in’ E.g. God is good - is the whole sentence the symbol or the underlying concept of goodness of God?

• Open to interpretation and change, even losing meaning over time. Too subjective & non-congnitive to be of any use except to the person or community in which it is used. Limitation.

• J.H Randall - non-cognitive and no objective reality - human endeavor but has a valuable cultural function.

How can Symbolic Language thought to be better than analogy?

• Symbolic language tells use what terms do, not what they truly mean.

• That is no more or less true than with analogy.

• A positive feature of Tillich’s approach is that by stressing the symbolic nature of religious language, Tillich reminds us of the dangers of anthropomorphising God - just as the Doctrine of Analogy does.

What are the problems with Symbolic Language?

• Can a symbol successfully represent something that is beyond our experience?

• On what criteria can we judge whether a symbol is adequate or not?

• How can we determine whether a symbol gives the right or wrong insights? Symbols interpreted in different ways by different people. Not consistent.

• Is Tillich right? - that religious language doesn’t refer to an objective reality?

• John Hick: Isn’t completely clear on what participating in a symbol means… Tillich doesn’t define or explain this.

• Many Christians do not think all religious language is symbolic.