8: Religious Language: Negative, Analogical or Symbolic
Apophatic Way A way of speaking about God and theological ideas using only terms that say what
(via negativa) God is not.
Cataphatic Eay A range of ways of speaking about God and theological ideas using only terms that
(via positiva) say what God is.
Univocal Words that mean the same thing when used in different contexts
language
Equivocal Ambiguous language that has two or more equally plausible meanings in different
language contexts
Truth claim A statement that asserts that something is factually true
The Via Negativa Whatever normal language we use to describe God, we are always going to make
(Negation/ him too small which is damaging and disrespectful
apophatic way) It's only meaningful to talk about God in the negative
It's better to accept the mysteries of God than to try to pin God down with flawed
human concepts
VN: Pseudo Argued that the via negative is the only way in which we can speak truthfully about
Dionysius God because he is beyond all human understanding and imagination. He wrote for
the need for the soul to become unified with God by going beyond the realm of
rationality - entering a 'cloud of unknowing' from which God can be approached.
He believed that we can be held back by the mind's desire for complete
understanding. He thought it was counter-productive to speak of God as though he
can be perceived by the sense or we can reach him through reason. People who
are seeking God should stop seeking answers to everything and should stop using
logic in their arguments. They should accept God will remain a mystery otherwise
their idea of God will be too small
VN: Maimonides Thought the best way to convey an accurate understanding of the nature of God is
through what he is not. He thought this would allow people to move closer to God
without limiting him. He used the example of a ship which is meaningless to someone
who doesn't know what that means
VN positives It does not reduce or anthropomorphise God
It supports the idea that God is ineffable and transcendent but still allows us to talk
about God in a meaningful way.
It's not belittling or limiting
It helps us recognise the uniqueness of God and his worthiness for worship
It can be understood across time and cultures because it is not figurative language
that requires interpretation
VN negatives It leads to very little understanding of God. It is not very useful e.g. to say white is not
black does not help someone understand white
It does not work for someone who knows nothing about God. You have to have
positive statements in order to choose the negative statements.
The Bible makes positive claims about God and God directly displays himself to us
It's not a true reflection of how religious people actually talk about God
Brain Davis Argues that 'only saying what something it not gives no indication of what it actually
is' He believed Maimonides' description of a ship could just as easily leave the person
thinking of a wardrobe or a coffin - its' easy to arrive at the wrong conclusion
Analogy A comparison between two things for the purpose of explanation or clarification. A
correspondence of partial similarity
Analogy: Aquinas Believed we couldn't say anything positive about God which is literally true because
human language limits God within our experience. He believed we could make
positive claims about God as long as we recognised that they are analogical. He
didn't say this is necessarily the right way - it's what we already do. It cannot tell us
anything precise about God but it is still meaningful. He rejected univocal language
because it makes God too small and does not convey his greatness as a mystery
sufficiently. He also rejected equivocal language because it is unhelpful. He
developed his doctrine of analogical language as a kind of middle path
Analogy: Aquinas Words that we apply to humans are related to how words are applied to God
- Analogy of because there is a causal relationship between the two. Our qualities of love,
Attribution wisdom, etc. are pale reflections of God's divine attributes
Analogy: Aquinas Words that we apply to God and to humans must be understood to be in different
- Analogy of proportions according to the type of being they are. John Hick used the example of
Proportion talking about a faithful dog and a faithful human. This faithfulness is in a different
Apophatic Way A way of speaking about God and theological ideas using only terms that say what
(via negativa) God is not.
Cataphatic Eay A range of ways of speaking about God and theological ideas using only terms that
(via positiva) say what God is.
Univocal Words that mean the same thing when used in different contexts
language
Equivocal Ambiguous language that has two or more equally plausible meanings in different
language contexts
Truth claim A statement that asserts that something is factually true
The Via Negativa Whatever normal language we use to describe God, we are always going to make
(Negation/ him too small which is damaging and disrespectful
apophatic way) It's only meaningful to talk about God in the negative
It's better to accept the mysteries of God than to try to pin God down with flawed
human concepts
VN: Pseudo Argued that the via negative is the only way in which we can speak truthfully about
Dionysius God because he is beyond all human understanding and imagination. He wrote for
the need for the soul to become unified with God by going beyond the realm of
rationality - entering a 'cloud of unknowing' from which God can be approached.
He believed that we can be held back by the mind's desire for complete
understanding. He thought it was counter-productive to speak of God as though he
can be perceived by the sense or we can reach him through reason. People who
are seeking God should stop seeking answers to everything and should stop using
logic in their arguments. They should accept God will remain a mystery otherwise
their idea of God will be too small
VN: Maimonides Thought the best way to convey an accurate understanding of the nature of God is
through what he is not. He thought this would allow people to move closer to God
without limiting him. He used the example of a ship which is meaningless to someone
who doesn't know what that means
VN positives It does not reduce or anthropomorphise God
It supports the idea that God is ineffable and transcendent but still allows us to talk
about God in a meaningful way.
It's not belittling or limiting
It helps us recognise the uniqueness of God and his worthiness for worship
It can be understood across time and cultures because it is not figurative language
that requires interpretation
VN negatives It leads to very little understanding of God. It is not very useful e.g. to say white is not
black does not help someone understand white
It does not work for someone who knows nothing about God. You have to have
positive statements in order to choose the negative statements.
The Bible makes positive claims about God and God directly displays himself to us
It's not a true reflection of how religious people actually talk about God
Brain Davis Argues that 'only saying what something it not gives no indication of what it actually
is' He believed Maimonides' description of a ship could just as easily leave the person
thinking of a wardrobe or a coffin - its' easy to arrive at the wrong conclusion
Analogy A comparison between two things for the purpose of explanation or clarification. A
correspondence of partial similarity
Analogy: Aquinas Believed we couldn't say anything positive about God which is literally true because
human language limits God within our experience. He believed we could make
positive claims about God as long as we recognised that they are analogical. He
didn't say this is necessarily the right way - it's what we already do. It cannot tell us
anything precise about God but it is still meaningful. He rejected univocal language
because it makes God too small and does not convey his greatness as a mystery
sufficiently. He also rejected equivocal language because it is unhelpful. He
developed his doctrine of analogical language as a kind of middle path
Analogy: Aquinas Words that we apply to humans are related to how words are applied to God
- Analogy of because there is a causal relationship between the two. Our qualities of love,
Attribution wisdom, etc. are pale reflections of God's divine attributes
Analogy: Aquinas Words that we apply to God and to humans must be understood to be in different
- Analogy of proportions according to the type of being they are. John Hick used the example of
Proportion talking about a faithful dog and a faithful human. This faithfulness is in a different
