essay: evaluate tilich's approach to religious language

judgement: Tilich successfully approaches religious language in a way that considers the emotional aspect, as well as acknowledging that whilst it may help humans to fathom descriptions of God and the supernatural, it does not belittle Him, as symbols remain merely representative » symbolic cataphatic way

P1: the language ie metaphors n symbols used are accessible to us, helping us to understand God and religious experiences better

  • includes visual images, rituals, stories n ideas that resonate with our lived experiences, thereby allowing individuals to connect on a deeper level with the divine.

  • symbols are something we can all participate in eg a flag » humans participate in the feeling of unity, surrounding certain national flags

  • “man’s ultimate concern must be expressed symbolically, because symbolic language alone is able to express the ultimate.” (tilich) » theory of participation

CP: paul edwards:

  • argued that symbols are meaningless as they can’t be verified or falsified thanks to subjectivity

  • “it doesn’t convey any facts.”

P2: symbolism manages to avoid the error of belittling God n religious experiences, much of what the religious language debate is about

  • the via positive (cataphatic way) n via negativa (apophatic way)» discourse between them n subtle difference because one way does not believe the other describes God correctly/adequately

  • symbolism mostly avoids the limitations that language is perceived to impose on God, because it is aware that it is merely representative and not precise » basically the entire premise of the notion

  • Tillich claimed that God is also a symbol for the ‘ground of being’ or for ‘being-itself’. It’s difficult to make full sense of this idea.

CP: william alston:

  • argued that important Christian doctrines eg heaven n hell = factual not symbolic

  • claimed that “there is no point trying to determine whether the statement is true or false”

  • religion is concerned with objective factual things eg salvation n afterlife

  • ∴religious lang can’t merely be symbolic

P3: symbolic religious language is about surrendering to our need for spiritual fulfilment

  • Religion is primarily about our ‘ultimate concern’, which isn’t anything historical, scientific or otherwise factual

  • Religious language doesn’t need to be literal/factual to be spiritually fulfilling

  • It only needs to participate in being-itself and thereby bridge our souls to our own participation in it

  • eg: When a Christian looks at a crucifix or prays, they can have deep spiritual feelings

CP:

  • lacks substance

  • further excludes those who havent had religious experiences

  • tilich believed religious language was difficult to explain to those who hadnt experienced » spiritually-symbolic nature