'Explain the problems of religious language Essay\r'

'Explain the problems of apparitional verbiage. (30) Some wrangle used at heart unearthly actors line may be viewed as contradictory to our inseparable beliefs and limpid view as human beings wiz compositors case of this would be the story of the ‘ everlasting(a) Mary’ as there is no logical explanation to how she gave birth. Many of the words used in religious language atomic number 18 in addition metaphysical and suck no physical representation wherefore it is in truth hard for us as manhood to fully comprehend the ideas they argon expressing.\r\nAn example of this is ‘ graven image is timeless’ as we as humans live in a world where time is very much present so humans’ start outing to understand the phrase causes problems as it is away of our past experiences. Many of the metaphysical questions deep down religious language can be snarled as it can non be answered through science or our logic for example ‘why were we created ? ’ or ‘how did we get here? ’. Some scholars turn over that our human language is not bountiful to describe religion thus we argon doing God an injustice by attempting to condone it in human language, and that we should not command that applying worldly language to religion to be adequate for our understanding of it.\r\nSimilarly any(prenominal)what argue that we should not even attempt to understand language hence why synagogues have no pictures of God. It may be argued that by giving God human-esk characteristics we are athromorphising god. Another key factor to religious language causing problems is that it is very problematical to interpret whether something should be taken true(a)ly or non-literally one example of this is God turning water into wine some interpreters may view it in its literal form whilst others may state that he turned a simple imaginativeness into something much more complex.\r\nEven if somebodies comment is completely correct t here is button up no real way of proving this. Something else which also causes confusion within religious language is the same words having different contexts for example ‘spirit’ one context is alcohol the other is God (the holy SPIRIT) these are to very different things and would cause large(p) confusion if interpreted incorrectly.\r\nAnother inherent problem of religious language is the rail line that Russell put forward when he tell we should not believe a literary argument which has no evidence to back itself up with and religious texts offer very piddling of this evidence. Ayer also stated that ‘if it is not analytical and cannot be tested, then best to identify it cognitively meaningfulness’ this ideology would be problematic for religious believers as religion cannot be tested.\r\n'