100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
ALEVEL OCR RS- ESSAY PLANNING DOCUMENT- RELIGIOUS LANGUAGE £8.26
Add to cart

Essay

ALEVEL OCR RS- ESSAY PLANNING DOCUMENT- RELIGIOUS LANGUAGE

 4 views  0 purchase
  • Institution
  • OCR

Full document of all possible essay titles that can come up in religious language topic. Essay plans are detailed and well structured with clear line of argument and named scholarly views. The essay plans can be adapted to be used for any title. Also includes list of all possible essay titles for t...

[Show more]

Preview 3 out of 19  pages

  • January 8, 2025
  • 19
  • 2023/2024
  • Essay
  • Unknown
  • A+
All documents for this subject (1)
avatar-seller
isabelgishen
RELIGIOUS LANGUAGE ESSAY PLANNING DOCUMENT



1ST TOPIC- NEGATIVE, ANALOGICAL OR SYMBOLIC - POSSIBLE EXAM QUESTIONS



Asses the apophatic way (via negativa)

Asses the cataphatic way (via positiva)

‘G-d can be talked about symbolically’- how far do you agree?

Is symbolic language comprehensible

‘Analogy is more effective than symbol for talking about g-d’- asses this view

Does Tillich capture religious language better than the apophatic way?

Critically compare analogy and via negativa as methods of approaching religious language

Is g-d a symbol

Does Tillich get around the issues surrounding the cataphatic way?

, EVALUATE THE APOPHATIC WAY AS A METHOD OF SPEAKING ABOUT G-D (40)


INTRO:

What is the apophatic way- claims that because words are unable to adequately describe g-d, we can
only make statements about what he is not

- Supported by Pseudo Dionysius and Maimonides
- Positive sentences about g-d, such as “g-d is good” cannot be valid- describing g-d, and infinite
being with finite language
- By stating what g-d is not the Apophatic way is not denying an understanding of g-d but simply
denying the ability to express him through human language

My line of argument: the apophatic way is both biblically and logically incoherent- goes against the
positive descriptions of g-d in the bible and forces humans to distort their natural means- works in theory
but fails in everyday practice

, PARA 1: PSEUDO-DIONYSIUS

Against

- Claims that g-d is beyond description and human understanding- influenced by Plato
- This means that we are unable to talk about g-d in human terms- as he is “beyond every
assertion”- includes being above language itself
- Human language is constricted to our own temporal barriers and cannot be applied to g-d
- Langauge limits and misleads our understanding of g-d, as he is so different to humans- when we
talk about “g-d is good” we risk looking at his goodness in the same way as human goodness
- In this way, we can only talk about what g-d is not- in order to preserve his divinity

Supported:

- William james- speaking about g-d in terms of what he is not fits in with religious experiences-
ineffable- they cannot be described with ordinary language
- ‘the birth of g-d in the soul’
- This can be seen as a good thing- Ottos description of g-d as “wholly other”- via negativa is
recognises his qualities of transcendence and otherness, suggesting he is radically different to
anything else we understand and therefore cannot be described with human language
- In this way: good because it recognises g-ds transcendence and prevents giving him human
values which would question his power.

But- for

- Via negativa undermines the teachings of the bible, which often refer to g-d in human terms
- There are human depictions of g-d having a “face” and “walking” in the garden of Eden- through
via negativa these are too easily dismisses and regarded as metaphorical
- In the gospel of John- g-d is referred to positively- “g-d is love”
- G-d even describes himself in positive terms “I am the lord your g-d”- suggests that positive
language about g-d is acceptable
- Via negativa conflicts with language of the bible
- It may be argued that Christian’s should be able to know that the “goodness” used to describe g-
d is different to humans, don’t need to rule out language to accept that

So- Apophatic way does not work in this sense

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying these notes from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller isabelgishen. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy these notes for £8.26. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

56880 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy revision notes and other study material for 15 years now

Start selling
£8.26
  • (0)
Add to cart
Added