Vocabulary: heavenly and religious

I seem to have come across an unusual number of words associated with the heavens (literal or metaphorical) and with religion, Christianity specifically.  This is a little odd because I haven't read any theology at all -- these words all came from books on other subjects.

supernal - celestial or divine
welkin - the sky
beatific - blissful or bestowing bliss
empyrean -  the highest heaven.  (In spite of its -an ending, this word is actually a noun, not an adjective.  It was an ancient term for a region containing pure fire -- the element that rises the most -- and was adopted by Christians.)
numinous - spiritual; supernatural; mysterious; beyond comprehension
paraclete - an advocate or intercessor; when capitalized, the Holy Spirit
theophany - an appearance of a god to a person
afflatus - inspiration, especially a divine imparting of knowledge.  (This word comes from the Latin meaning "to blow on," so it has the bad association in my mind with someone's breath too close to me.)
anagoge - a spiritual or allegorical interpretation of words.  (This word has four syllables, an-a-go-jee.)
soteriology - the doctrine of salvation through Christ (unlike all the other words on this list, this one appears to have a meaning only within Christianity, although I wouldn't be surprised if it gets used metaphorically occasionally).
demiurge - the creator of the world (originally used by Plato in this sense, later adopted by the Gnostics)
hypostasis - (1) the essence or essential part of something; (2) any of the three substance of the Trinity, or Christ in his human or divine nature; (3) in medicine, the accumulation of blood due to poor circulation.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Country Music

I noticed a long time ago that there isn't much difference between the sound of country music and rock music nowadays. If I'm surfing my radio and I come to a station playing jazz, classical, or rap, I recognize it right away; but if I come to a country or rock station, I often can't tell which it is until the song is half over. Country songs often have screaming guitars that would fit equally well in a hard rock song, and only a minority have a recognizably country instrument such as a fiddle or a banjo. All the same, no one could listen to a country music station for more than a few minutes without realizing that it is definitely not a rock station. What are the differences? There are some stylistic differences. Country songs are more likely to have a boogey beat or certain western-sounding bass lines. They also tend to be more formulaic: if you can't predict how a country song ends, you probably don't listen to much country music. But those things aren'
Read more

Science and Philosophy, Part I: Hume and Popper

I've been listening to a lecture series on philosophy recently, and, even though I haven't gotten past the Greeks yet, it has reminded me of a number of issues that trouble me about science. I want to take the opportunity to express my concerns here. Along the way, I will probably oversimplify philosophy a great deal -- not on purpose, but rather because I have only a simplistic understanding of it. I welcome responses to clear up my misconceptions. One of my issues with science is the famous idea of Karl Popper that it can never establish positive claims, only falsify wrong ones. The history of this goes back to David Hume, the 18th century Scottish sceptic. He shook up the philosophical world by claiming that science could never prove anything through induction -- that is, drawing conclusions about physical laws based on observations. The classic illustration is the sun's rising. Even though the sun has risen every day for our whole lives, and for countless human l
Read more

Three stages in liberal denial of media bias

I was 15 years old in 1984, and an avid follower of politics and the news. When Reagan was making his decision whether to run for re-election, I was opposed to it. It wasn't that I didn't like Reagan; I loved him. But I was convinced that he wouldn't stand a chance in the election, and I didn't want to see him lose. Of course, he went on to win one of the most lopsided elections in history. Why was I so wrong? Because I had been watching network news (the only kind, back then) and the coverage was overwhelmingly negative. Since that time, I have watched with disbelief as liberals have criticized Fox News as unbalanced, culminating in the amazing spectacle of the president himself declaring that Fox is not a legitimate source of journalism. Meanwhile, these same liberals refuse to acknowledge that ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, etc. (ad nauseum) have any bias of their own. What makes this all the more incredible is that a number of studies have been produced demonstr
Read more