Symbols and Signs
November 27, 2025
Man’s ultimate concern must be expressed symbolically, because symbolic language alone is able to express the ultimate […]
Symbols have one characteristic in common with signs: they point beyond themselves to something else.
Decisive is the fact that signs do not participate in the reality of that to which they point, while symbols do. Therefore, signs can be replaced for reasons of expediency or convention, while symbols cannot.
This leads to the second characteristic of the symbol: It participates in that to which it points; the flag participates in the power and dignity of the nation for which it stands.
The third characteristic of a symbol is that it opens up new levels of reality which are otherwise closed to us. A picture and a poem reveal elements of reality which cannot be approached scientifically.
Symbols cannot be reproduced intentionally — this is the fifth characteristic. They grow out of the individual or collective unconscious and cannot function without being accepted by the unconscious dimension of our being.
The sixth and last characteristic of the symbol is a consequence of the fact that symbols cannot be invented. Like living beings, they grow and they die. They grow when the situation is ripe for them, and they die when the situation changes. […]
Is it not only in those cases in which the content of the ultimate concern is called “God” that we are in the realm of symbols? The answer is that everything which is a matter of unconditional concern is made into a god.
If the nation is someone’s ultimate concern, the name of the nation becomes a sacred name and the nation receives divine qualities which far surpass the reality of the being and functioning of the nation.
The reason for this transformation of concepts into symbols is the character of ultimacy and the nature of faith. That which is the true ultimate transcends the realm of finite reality infinitely. Therefore, no finite reality expresses it directly and properly. Religiously speaking, “God transcends his own name.”
Whatever we say about that which concerns us ultimately, whether or not we call it God, has a symbolic meaning. It points beyond itself while participating in that to which it points. In no other way can faith express itself adequately. The language of faith is the language of symbols. […]
Where there is ultimate concern, God can be identified in the name of God. One god can deny the other one. Ultimate concern cannot deny its own character as ultimate. Therefore, it affirms what is meant by the word “God.”
~ Paul Tillich, Dynamics of Faith, Chapter 3
