Via Negativa L/O: To learn and understand what is meant by the term Via Negativa. Task One: What is God? Write a short list of what you believe God is or is not.

What does the Via Negativa Mean? The Negative Way is a way in which one should approach the subject of God. It states that we cannot talk about God in positive terms (God is good and just etc) as this is miss-leading and confusing. Instead we must only talk of God in negative terms, such as what God is not (God is not mortal, we cannot see God).

The Problem of Language For people to understand each other when they speak, words need to have an associated meaning. If you say that something is cold, square, heavy, you would understand what these words mean. When talking about these qualities in relation to God, they are seen to limit God. Our understanding is limited because our Language is limited. If we say that God is good, we understand what that means, however, God is more than good, something we cannot express with our limited language and understanding.

Positive and Negative Language We should not use Positive Language at it is flawed, capable of only encompassing what we already understand. – If we are to say that God is good we can only understand this in terms of what we know good to mean. The use of Negative language (phrases that deny rather than confirm) are less limiting as they do not have to remain constricted by our understanding. – God is not bad is less limiting that God is good.

Task Two Take the following Positive Attributes commonly associated with God and write them in such a way as to conform with the Via Negativa – God is good – God is just – God is all-loving – God is forgiving

Pseudo-Dionysius Pseudo-Dionysius was a 6 th Century Theologian, Philosopher and Christian Mystic. He argued that using the Negative Way was the only way to speak truthfully about God, because God is beyond all human understanding.

Moses Maimonides Moses Maimonides ( ce) was a great Jewish thinking and theologian, who strong supported the Via Negativa. Maimonides explains that the attributes of God can only be understood through what they are not.

Problems of the Negative Way Not all philosophers agree with the Negative Way. – The writer Brian Davies states that simply describing something in terms of what it is not, gives no clue to what it actually is. Declaring that God is not a Wombat doesn’t help you come closer to understanding what God is. I am thinking of an object, it is not like a trumpet, binoculars or a telephone, what is it?

The Problem of a Presupposed God One of the problems highlighted through the use of Negative Language, is that one must have a presupposed idea in mind for these statements are trying to make sense of. – The statement God is not bad does nothing show that God is good, however the implication inside the Religious Language framework, makes it so. Without this Religious Language framework, such negative statements mean nothing.

Task Three: The Limits of Negative Language Negative Language is supposed to allow one to come closer to God through the use of language that does not confuse. To what extent does Negative Language allow one to come closer to God or does it confuse the subject further?

Positive Language – The best option we have? While philosophers such as Pseudo-Dionysius and Maimonides state that Positive Language leads us deliberately away from our understanding of God. It could however be argued that Negative Language serves only as a way of stating what God is not, failing to confirm any of the attributes we would normally associate with God. Could it be that despite the fact that language is flawed, that it is our best option to explain God? While it might deliberately limit God to ways in which we can understand, at least there is some level of comprehension present.

So... To what extent does the Negative Way allow us to more fully understand God? In what does the use of Positive Language limit our understanding of God? Assess whether Positive or Negative language allows us to further the understanding of God – Make reference to the limits of Positive Language and the confusion that Negative Language can cause.