Bowker on the approaching God through language
What we say about God is bound be be approximate, provisional, carriagable and often wrong…but that does not mean we should not talk about God - Bowker
Sally McFague on the role of religious language
Theology is constructive but there is a reality outside language: Language reflects how we relate to God rather than what God is. Models of how people relate to God are complimentary, not conflicting
Vardy on the ineffability of religious language
What language could a fish use to describe water?
Everyday language
General Language
- Concerns things that can be experience. These matters are spatiotemporal
- Emotions cannot be ‘seen’ but are felt so widely that no one doubts they exist
Difficult Language
- Difficult concepts can be described
- Some may be accepted without full understanding (quantum mechanics for instance)
- —–> Similar difficulty describing a religious concept
Religious Language: the difficulty talking about God in everyday terms
- Many people have experienced a sense of believing there is something ‘higher’; a ‘spiritual dimension’
- However, people may not articulate this. This may be due to:
a) Lack of appropriate language
b) Fear of being misunderstood - This may explain the level of contradiction in religious language
- The issue of how to describe a transcendent God in spatio-temporal terms is raised. People do discuss God, so what can words really mean in relation to ‘God’?
The Via Negative
- Movement innitiated by Maimonides (1130-1204) and influenced by Greek work preserved in Bhagdad/Cairo after burning of Alexandria
- Accepted:
a) Aristotlean conclusion that God was outside spacetime
b) Jewish claim that God is one. God is unique and ‘wholly simple’ so cannot have a body that can grow and divide. This means anthropomorphism in scripture is purely metaphysical and never literal - In ‘The Guide to the Perplexed’ Maimonides concluded that language was so rooted in spacetime that it cannot be applied to God
- -> God should not be talked about (Silence is praise to thee - Psalm 65)
- —–> VIA NEGATIVE:
- God never to be talked about
- Mysticism/spirituality/prayer
- Goldfish analogy: if a goldfish had to describe dryness it would start with ‘not wet’
Contribution of St Thomas Aquinas
- St Thomas Aquinas (1200-1280) agreed with Maimonides (1130-1204) on simplicity of God. Quotes Botheius who says God has “The whole, simultaneous and permanent possession of eternal life”
- However disagreed with the Via Negative. Said language can be used if in a very particular way. He rejects:
a) Univocal language: language used in spatiotemporal world that can’t be applied to God in the same way. Ie “John is good but God is more good” as this puts God in the same category as humans
b) Equivocal language: language that has more than one meaning in different situations. Eg Cricket bat and Vampire bat. This would nullify language as no connection between language in world/God
- Aquinas proposes that analogy is the way forward. (See separate cards on attribution and proportion)
Aquinas’ (1200-1280) Analogy of Attribution
- As God is the creator there is a causal link between God + Universe
- let God = A and Universe = B
- A –> B
- B possesses C
- Therefore God possesses necessary qualities to bring about C in B
- Therefore link between C+A
-Alternatively
Bull and urine both healthy, but what it means for them to be healthy is different. Bull made urine, so bull possesses capacity to make urine good
___________________________________________>
-SO God possesses attributes necessary to bring out attributes in humans. We cannot describe these attributes but we know God has them - Does not say very much, but what it says is not meaningless
- Significant because:
a) rejects Maimonides
b) prevents us talking about God in human terms
Aquinas’ (1200-1280) Analogy of Proportion
Goodness and purpose
- All things have been created and all things have the potential to fulfil their nature to be 100% good. To be 100% good is what it means to fulfil their nature
- Perfection is determined by observing the behaviour of the majority
- Humans can be physically and morally defective
God’s purpose
- Accepts Aristotle’s claim that God has ‘pure actuality’ and therefore no potential
- Simple God is outside spacetime, therefore cannot change
- God therefore can’t be other than what God is, so God is 100% what it means to be God and is 100% good (Exodus 3: “I am what I am”
Impact
- We can say God is 100% what it means to be God, but we don’t know what that is
- Human language can therefore say something positive but with limited actual content
Metaphor outlines
Outline:
- Different to an analogy: analogy represents a clear relationship, a metaphor does not. E.g. “God is my rock” does not indicate that God is a rock. God may however share some qualities of a rock
- This means there’s less chance of being misled as allows meaningful comparison with world but acknowledges God’s otherness
- Allows expression of religious truths with no equivalent but language that is too metaphysical may lack substance
Should always be understood metaphorically:
- Ramsey says that religious life involves commitment and language should only be viewed in the context of that commitment
- Tautologies are not meaningless. Ie ‘Fishing is fishing’ - meaning understood but content not
- Reading analogy: toddler reading ‘cat’ understands the word and the association to the animal cat but does not understand the implications of c, a and t
- –> Religious language to be understood in light of this. Never meant to be understood literally
Examples of metaphor
Christianity: ‘father’ means teacher and saver
Hinduism: ‘Soul of the world’
Islam: 99 names, ‘light of the world’
Advantages and disadvantages of metaphor
Advantages:
- Different to analogy, no chance of suggesting direct relationship
- Ramsey: models useful as a reference point but must use appropriate qualifiers
Disadvantages:
- Blackstone: we must be able to interpret metaphors to understand their implications
Symbolism outlined
- Both in language and iconic images (murtis)
- Figurative and metaphorical but can work in the same way as analogies
- Tillich suggests that symbols participate in the reality they allude to. Distinguish between sign and symbols
- Can trigger an existential response: we react, and are reminded that we may have a similar reaction to God
Examples of symbols
Xnity: light
Judaism: Star
Hinduism: the sea in the upanishads
Advantages and disadvantages of symbols
Advantages:
- Expresses the character of God
- Visual = easier to understand
- Symbolic language alone expresses the ultimate because it transcends the capacity of any finite reality to express it directly - Harper
Disadvantages:
- Symbols may replace God (idolotary)
- Become outdated or lose meaning
- Restricted to understanding community
- Subjective interpretation
- Can be hijacked eg. swastika
Outline myths
- Stories expressing profound religious truths
- Rudolf Bultmann says religious language must be demythologised, but there was a truth behind these myths
- It is difficult for contemporary readers to understand this mythological dimension
- The mythological dimension is of myths and short stories where the invisible world is symbolised, description “beyond literal description” (Thompson)
- Can be historical, but will mostly convey ideas of God
Examples of myths
Xnity: ontological claims about god in creation and resurrection, therefore not clear if historical or symbolic
Islam: God tells Adam to make ‘Kabba’ (earthly counterpart to heaven) as it was destroyed by the great flood (of noah)
Hinduism: Common in aural tradition. Eg Upanishads say that creation was golden egg split on cosmic ocean to create immanent and transcendent levels of reality
Advantages and disadvantages of myths
Advantages
- Creates an ideal to believe in
- Memorable
- Easy to pass on
- Cataphatic
Disadvantages
- Outdated
- Subjective interpretation
- Conflict over historical vs metaphorical
H.J. Richards on myth
“Myths, then are ‘true’ not in the sense that what they speak of actually
happened, or will happen, but in the same sense that they express truly what is
always happening
Ian Ramsey on Models and Qualifiers
- Language is a ‘model’ for God
- Like a scientific model, it doesn’t exactly replicate conditions in reality
- Qualifiers must be used to make language appropriate for God and not confined to a ‘human’ level of description
- Ie God is good. Model is ‘good’ and qualifier is ‘infinitely’
Arguments against religious language: Logical positivism and the Vienna circle
- 20C philosophers inc. Bertrand Russell and Wittgenstein called for greater clarity of language
- Movement of ‘logical positivism’ identified two types of statement that could be verified in the style of a scientific statement:
a) Analytical ie ‘a triangle has three sides’ - fact that can be checked
b) Synthetic ie ‘if i punch you it will hurt’ , truth can be verified
Arguments against religious language: Verification Principle generally and arguments against it
- Statement only meaningful if it can be verified by sense experience. If it cannot be verified this way, it is meaningless
Criticised by John Hick who proposed eschatological verification (after death)
Arguments against religious language:Strong Verification Principle
- Statement only meaningful if it can be directly verified empirically
HOWEVER - Many obviously true statements are made false by this. Eg all sweaty socks stink
- Historical statements that are taken to be true are made false as they can’t be verified
- Scientific statements like ‘metals expand when heated’ can’t all be verified
—> Weak Verification Principle
Arguments against religious language:Weak verification principle
- Developed in response to criticism of the strong verification principle
- Says that statement can be meaningful only if we know what needs to be observed in principle
- Statement only needs to be established as probable, not possible
Criticised by Keith Ward who says everything is falsifiable in principle so the statement excludes nothing
