Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-5lx2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-01T01:32:13.041Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Problem of the Missing Article in the Use of ‘God’

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2008

Rien Op Den Brouw
Affiliation:
Faculty of Theology, Utrecht University, P.O. Box 80105, 3508 TL Utrecht, The Netherlands

Extract

This article is concerned with the use of ‘God’ in Judaeo-Christian discourse. The debate over ‘God’ has mainly centred on the puzzling issue of whether ‘God’ is a proper name with no descriptive connotation at all or whether it is a descriptive term with unique reference. In my view four things have to be taken into account in analysing the use of this term. In the first place, the term ‘God’ is a speech or communication phenomenon. Any treatment of this term should therefore consider the intentions, purposes, beliefs that a speaker has in using this word. In the second place, in Christian theistic discourse this term occurs both with and without modification. ‘The God of Israel’ is an example of ‘God’ with modification. It can be analysed as a noun phrase in which ‘God’ fulfils the function of HEAD, ‘the’ is a definite article filling the DETERMINER slot, and ‘of Israel’ is a prepositional phrase functioning as POSTMODIFIER. The use of only the term ‘God’ is an example without modification. In the third place, when Christians use ‘God’, either with or without modification, they use it to refer to, to describe or address one particular being. In the fourth place, when they use ‘God’ without modification, they do not use this term with an (in-) definite article. In this article three accounts of the term ‘God’ will be discussed: the proper name analysis, the definite description analysis, and the title-phrase analysis. Grammatically speaking, among the defenders of any of these analyses there is an agreed consensus on the classification of ‘God’ as a noun, but there is a disagreement about whether ‘God’ belongs to the category of proper nouns or to that of common nouns. Those adopting one of the last two analyses assume that ‘God’ is a common noun. This article presents an inquiry into the strengths and weaknesses of each of the three analyses. In brief, the question we are seeking to answer is the following: what kind of term is ‘God’ and what is a Christian saying when he says ‘God’?

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The observations presented here can be found in F. Jong, M. G. de, Oversteegen, E. & Verkuyl, H. J., Betekenis en Taalstructuur: Inleiding in de Formele Semantiek (Dordrecht: Foris Publications, 1988), ch. 4.Google Scholar

2 Although Nelson Pike (1970) has observed that ‘God’ has the grammatical features of a proper noun, he remains vague about his judgement that this term does not seem to be a proper name in ‘JHWH is God’.

3 Brom, L. J. van den, God Alomtegenwoordig (Kampen: Kok, 1982), p. 14.Google Scholar

4 Kuitert, H. M., I Have My Doubts: How to Become a Christian without Being a Fundamentalist (London: S.C.M. Press, 1993), p. 32.Google Scholar

5 Pike, N., God and Timelessness (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1970), p. 29.Google Scholar

6 Ibid. p. 30.

7 Wittgenstein, Ludwig, Philosophical Investigations (1953; rpt. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1976).Google Scholar

8 Van den Brom, 1982, ch. 1.

9 Ibid., p. 17.

10 Ibid., pp. 17–19.

11 See note 6.