Some Notes on God and Language

(Originally written March 15, 2007 in Book 13)

Part 3: God and Language

The problem of religious language

Means of Expressing God:

Many ways of expressing God are available: ritual, symbol, myth, dogma, etc.

Some nonlinguistic means of expressing religious transcendence

Some argue that ritualism came before myth because even animals are ritualistic.

Religious Expression in Ritual

Ritual - "formalized symbolic way in which a social group periodically expressed and strengthens its beliefs and values" (212).

Religious Expression in Symbol

Symbol involves both myth and ritual.

Religious symbols point toward the transcendent.

Religious expression in myth

Myths are symbols of faith combined in stories about human-divine encounters.

A myth is a true story to the religious person.

Myth is a symbolic way of expressing one's religious ultimate - "It is an empirical way of expressing the non-empirical transcendent" (215).

Linguistic Means of Expressing the Transcendent

Written regulation, creed and dogma are the primary form of linguistic expression of the Transcendent.

The Origin of God-Talk

F. M. Conford argued that doctrine was an attempt to give logos to a mythos.

A. N. Whitehead believed that dogmas was the enunciation of a general truth.

The Advantages of Linguistic Expressions of God

One can understand, propagate and preserve his or her faith through linguistic expressions of God.

The conceptualization of religious experience is in some sense necessary. Experience without expression is meaningless.

The Dangers of Religious Language

The danger of over conceptualization of religion in a disassociation with experience.

Some times dogma can can over step its bounds and replace true religious experience.

Religious language and its Concomitant Problems

Religious language must avoid verbal idolatry and experiential emptiness.

The Adequacy of Language as Means of Expressing God

The God of theism is infinite and only the language that cannot limit God is sufficient in describing God.

But any Goed-Talk that is so transcendent as to have no grounding in human experience will be devoid of meaning.

Does language imply limitations?

There is no way of eliminating a priori the possibility of meaningful God-Talk.

What is Language?

Heidegger admits that language often involves objectification, but does not necessarily do so.

Ian T. Ramsey stated that if language is capable of pointing beyond what is empirical ten it is essentially not limited.

To state what a person fully means by God one must:
1. Narrate his mass experiences
2. Describe the contexts in which he believes he uses the word "God"
3. Enunciate his understanding of human understanding