Font size
WorksheetsReligious Language - Full Topic Quiz
Total questions: 59
Worksheet time: 30mins
There are two categories that religious language can be put into: (select multiple options then press 'submit')
Cognitive
Non-cognitive
Analytic
Synthetic
Cognitive language...
Makes factual assertions, or claims that can be proved true or false
Is any language that requires a person to cognitively think about it
Presents symbols, metaphors, ethical statements, emotion etc.
Can only be verified in practice
Non-cognitive language
Makes factual assertions, or claims that can be proved true or false
Is any language that requires a person to cognitively think about it
Presents symbols, metaphors, ethical statements, emotion etc.
Is any language that is unverifiable and meaningless
The verification principle was presented by...
Ayer
Flew
Hick
Hume
Ayer argued...
Religious language was meaningless in every way
Religious language is untrue because it cannot be verified
Religious language is untrue because God is physical
Religious language is meaningless unless you're talking from an atheist perspective
There are two types of verification:
in practice
in principle
in science
in hypothesis
Religious language is meaningless because God is...
Metaphysical
Megaphysical
Physical
Natural
The falsification principle was presented by...
Flew
Ayer
Hick
Hume
Flew argued that...
Religious language is meaningless because there is no evidence against it.
Religious language is all completely meaningless.
Religious language is meaningless when people don't have a reason not to believe in it
Religious language is meaningless because there is so much evidence against God.
Flew explained his argument by using...
A parody
The Parable of the Gardener
The Parable of the Celestial City
The Parable of the Good Samaritan
The Parable of the Gardener shows that...
"God dies the death of a thousand qualifications."
"God dies the death of a thousand qualities."
"God dies the death of falsification."
"God dies the death of verification."
Eschatological Verification was presented by...
Hick
Hume
Wittgenstein
Hare
Eschatological means...
Life after death/end of the world
In the future
In heaven
Religious language
Hick's Eschatological Language shows that religious language can still be...
Cognitive
Non-cognitive
For Hick, eschatological verification was an extension of...
verification in practice
verification in principle
falsification in practice
falsification in principle
For Hick, all religious language is meaningful because...
Everything is personal interpretation, so there is no absolute 'truth'
We will verify it after we have died
We make meaning for ourselves
God is physical and therefore verifiable
Bliks was developed by...
Hare
Hume
Wittgenstein
Aquinas
A Blik is...
our worldview
our cognitive understanding of the world
our sense experiences (empirical data)
the same for everyone
A Blik makes religious language meaningful because...
it is irrational but affects how we act
it shows that we can try to prove God using different evidence
it shows it can be falsified
each Blik is in a different game
Hare demonstrated his point by using...
a parody
The Parable of the Talents
The Parable of the Lunatic
The Parable of the Invisible Gardener
Language games was argued by...
Wittgenstein
Hick
Aquinas
Augustine
Wittgenstein argued that, to understand the meaning of language, you had to...
"Don't think, look!"
"Find what is scientifically verifiable."
"Lose your mind and find God."
"Understand the Blik behind the language."
Everybody plays different language 'games' where there are different...
rules
ways of verifying arguments
Bliks
interpretations
This means that the science 'game' and religion 'game'...
can be played together
have similar rules
have different rules
should be treated the same
Religious language is therefore meaningful to...
Everyone
Religious people
Scientists
No-one
Which of these arguments are presenting/arguing against religious language being COGNITIVE?
Verification
Falsification
Eschatological verification
Bliks
Language games
Which of these arguments are presenting/arguing against religious language being NON-COGNITIVE?
Verification
Falsification
Eschatological verification
Bliks
Language games
What language used for God does Aquinas reject?
Univocal
Equivocal
Analogical
Non-cognitive
What is univocal language?
Words that mean the same thing each time.
Words that mean something different in different situations.
Words that are seen only as literal.
Words that are seen only as figurative.
What is equivocal language?
Words that mean the same thing each time.
Words that mean something different in different situations.
Words that are seen only as literal.
Words that are seen only as figurative.
Univocal language is inadequate because...
it anthropomorphises God
it makes God seem different to humans
God is beyond human understanding
We have no language for God
Equivocal language is also inadequate because...
we don't know what it means in God's context/situation
we should only talk about God in literal ways
it is not verifiable
it cannot be falsified
Aquinas instead uses analogy. Analogies are...
a comparison to help understanding
a way of directly describing God
a comparison between two things that have no link
made up stories about complex concepts
Aquinas talked about 2 types of analogies:
attribution
proportionality
direct
indirect
The analogy of attribution helps us to understand...
God's qualities
what God has done in the past
how to anthropomorphise God
how to verify the language of God
When we describe a person as 'good', this is an analogy for God's goodness because...
God is perfectly good
God cannot do anything wrong
God caused the person to exist
there is no link between the person and God
This is because the Bible says...
"God created mankind in his image."
"God created images of humans."
"The image of God created them."
"In the beginning, God created the earth and humans."
For Aquinas, nature and the natural world is...
an analogy for God
an analogy for humans
full of equivocal language we can use for God
full of univocal language we can use for God
Analogy of proportionality is...
descriptions are proportional to what they describe
God is bigger than humans
making sure descriptions receive the correct proportions of analogy
only saying limited statements about God
What is kataphatic language?
Using positive terms to describe God.
Describing God as a positive God and not a bad God.
Describing God in negative terms.
Describing God as a negative God and not a good God.
What does it mean to use 'positive' terms for God?
Describing what God is like
Describing what God is not
Describing God through analogies
Describing God in a way that shows he is good
What is apophatic language?
Using positive terms to describe God.
Describing God as a positive God and not a bad God.
Describing God in negative terms.
Describing God as a negative God and not a good God.
What does it mean to use 'negative' terms for God?
Describing what God is like
Describing what God is not
Describing God through analogies
Describing God in a way that shows he is good
Which of these statements follow the Via Negativa?
God is good.
God is omnipotent.
God can create a square circle.
God is not finite.
Maimonides said:
"the sun is hidden to eyes that are too weak to comprehend it"
"the sun is too weak to be comprehended"
"the sun is hidden to eyes that are too human to comprehend it"
"the eye is too hidden for the comprehensible to weaken it"
Maimonides said...
that we can understand God by gathering the negatives together
that we can understand God by seeing him as a negative God
that we cannot say anything at all about God
that we will never have any knowledge of God
Pseudo-Dionysius argued that literal descriptions of God...
limit God
enhance God
help us to understand God
provide verifiable evidence
Pseudo-Dionysius said about God:
"It is beyond assertion and denial."
"It is beyond assertion."
"It is beyond denial."
"It is beyond literal statements."
According to Tillich, what defines a sign?
Something that is part of the world and points to something else
Something that is part of the world and points to itself
It could be replaced
It could not be replaced
According to Tillich, what defines a symbol?
Something that is part of the world and points to something else
Something that is part of the world and points to itself
It could be replaced
It could not be replaced
Symbols are different from signs because:
They cannot be replaced with anything else
The symbol points to a greater and deeper meaning
They point to something else
They are part of this world
Which of these are signs?
Which of these are symbols?
Tillich said that symbols are good because they:
"point beyond themselves"
"point to something else"
"point to God"
"point beyond the supernatural"
Tillich said that: "The language of _____ is the language of symbols."
faith
religion
God
humans
Which of these Bible quotes is using symbolic language?
"I am the bread of life"
"he saw Peter's mother-in-law lying in bed with a fever"
"Then the whole town went out to meet Jesus"
"While Jesus was having dinner at Matthew's house"
Which of these would Tillich see as symbolic and NOT literal?
Jesus' resurrection
God as being-itself
Jesus heals a paralysed man
Jesus ascended up to heaven
When Tillich calls God being-itself, what does he mean?
We experience God in our everyday experiences and existence
God is itself a separate being
God is outside the universe
We experience God through the historical truth of the Bible
Which of these Bible quotes shows that God is 'being-itself' and not a 'being'?
"God is love"
"For God so loved the world"
"Our Father, who is in heaven"
"Jesus wept"
