anthropopathy


Also found in: Medical, Encyclopedia, Wikipedia.
Related to anthropopathy: Anthropopathic

anthropopathy

(ˌænθrəˈpɒpəθɪ) or

anthropopathism

n
the attribution of human passions, etc, to a deity, object, etc
anthropopathic adj
Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged, 12th Edition 2014 © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2014

an•thro•pop•a•thy

(ˌæn θrəˈpɒp ə θi)

also an`thro•pop′a•thism,



n.
ascription of human passions or feelings to a thing or a being not human, as to a deity.
[1640–50; < Medieval Latin anthrōpopatheia < Greek anthrōpopátheia humanness. See anthropo-, -pathy]
Random House Kernerman Webster's College Dictionary, © 2010 K Dictionaries Ltd. Copyright 2005, 1997, 1991 by Random House, Inc. All rights reserved.

anthropopathism, anthropopathy

the assignment of human feelings or passions to something not human, as a deity or an animal. — anthropopathic. adj.
See also: Animals
the assignment of human feelings to a god or inanimate object. — anthropopathite, n.anthropopathic, adj.
See also: God and Gods
-Ologies & -Isms. Copyright 2008 The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
References in periodicals archive ?
6, [...] let us believe that he did repent" (CPW 6:134), stating clearly that "In my opinion, then, theologians do not need to employ anthropopathy, or the ascription of human feelings to God." Similarly, it seems unnecessary in many of Milton's other descriptions of God's demonstrating emotion (see CPW 1:274) to interpret them as subject to accommodation, and in De Doctrina Milton takes this to the most surprising lengths: "Let us believe that it is not beneath God to feel what grief he does feel, to be refreshed by what refreshes him, and to fear what he does fear" (CPW 6:140).
Throughout the history of theology, anthropomorphism and anthropopathy have been closely tied, and theologians have been aware that to entertain passibility seriously is to grant latitude to the idea of a corporeal God that carries far more radical and serious implications.
From this biblical rejection of anthropomorphism in Adversus Marcionem, Tertullian similarly repudiates anthropopathy and maintains that the directional alignment of his analogy is from God to man and not from man to God: "O these fools, who from things human form conjectures about things divine, and because in mankind passions [...] are taken to be of a corruptive character, suppose that in God also they are of the same quality" (131).