Actual theology: Pope Benedict's argument?

Question

Serious answers only, please.

As I understand it, Pope Benedict has been objecting to Islam on very interesting theological grounds. As reported in the New Yorker, the Pope's point is that Catholocism teaches that rational thought is a path to knowing God, whereas Islam teaches that God is unknowable through rational though. The Pope has apparently claimed that this difference makes discussion between the two faiths impossible. As I am no specialist in either religion, I can't comment on this. Can you?

dmlk2, fireball, vinslave, and Jeanmarie--you are giving your own opinion, when I am asking about the doctrinal positions of established religions. There is a great deal of thought and writing that has gone into the question of faith and every specific of most religions. I am asking about that thinking, not yours. Go away.

The Beach Slave--last time I checked, this was Yahoo! Answers, not Yahoo! Condescension. Asking a question here can be a part of "a little more research" as long as people refrain from snotty unhelpful responses like yours. See the response made by Skepsis if you ever care to join in the spirit of this thing. Otherwise, go away.

NewCatholic--I think you are correct in your outlining of those major differences, however I am addressing a finer point of difference. Skepsis' response may fill you in.

KenMikaze--you seem to be honestly grappling with the concepts, which I admire. This question refers to ideas you seem unfamiliar with. Stick around.

1saintofgod--you're just giving your own opinion, not analyzing these positions. Go away.

Skepsis--thanks! Good one.

Answer 1

It's a gross oversimplification based on misunderstanding. He is using the word "know" with different connotations. In its Scholastic Age, the Catholic Church applied Aristotelian logic to its theology, with debatable success. Consequently they are committed to the notion that human reason can find "God", or at least that religion makes sense. Compare the Orthodox Church. For them, the Divine Liturgy is all about immersing oneself in the mystery of God. Both traditions have their mystical component and their rational arguments, but their emphases are very different.

While Anselm, Bonaventure and Thomas Aquinas were diagraming their theology, the Muslims were having an enlightenment period of their own, focusing on science and mathematics rather than trying to define God. Their concepts hold up. Scholastic theology has some crucial logic gaps that weren't apparent at the time.

God is essentially undefinable. We can reason our way to what God SHOULD be, omnipotent, omniscient, eternal, just, merciful, etc., but some of these qualities conflict in their absolute forms, which God logically must have. As an absolute being, as the ground of our reality, what we call "God" must transcend our time and space-bound ideas. For example, for a God who is perfectly self-sufficient and invulnerable, concepts such as happiness and love should be meaningless. Yet we speak of a loving God, of God AS love. It doesn't actually make "sense".

I think Benedict was complaining about a consistent Muslim attitude that God's will is not to be questioned, even though we may not understand it. But there is a difference in accepting what happens and attempting to actively determine what God's "will" is. Acceptance can be a manifestation of humility (or fatalism as some may call it). Interpretation of the will of God can be a sincere attempt at harmony and obedience, or arrogant blasphemy among those who presume to speak for God. Both Christians and Muslims are demonstrably capable of all these things.

Benedict has highlighted the need to agree on definitions and intellectual conventions when discussing esoteric notions like God and faith. But he has also indicated his unwillingness to find common ground, insisting that his interlocutors speak his language alone. It would seem more helpful to acknowledge the differences, speak one's own idiom, and try to listen in the other's idiom. But Benedict hasn't shown much diplomatic skill so far.

Answer 2

IMHO, both arguments lead to nowhere... If you believe that rational thoughts lead to God, think for a moment how large is the universe, how could you fathom it? However, if God is unknowable, then you couldn't even prove if there's a God at all. God has given man a semblance of knowing a higher being. And only God can reveal Himself to anybody anytime.

Those two arguments are just putting God in a Box. But then again, I'm no religious expert, nor am I a Theologian.

Answer 3

I think you need to do a little more research.

There is an Editorial from a September issue of the New York Times that is critical of the some of the Pope's comments.

The Pope has apologized if he offended anyone saying that his purpose was to promote dialogue in an effort to pursue people of differing views.

Answer 4

Where did the Pope claim that this difference makes discussion between the two faiths impossible???

I am Catholic and have not heard any reference to this.

The difference between Christian and Muslim is that Muslims believe that Jesus was just a Prophet and Christians believe that he is the Son of God.

Muslims believe that Muhammad was also a prophet of the same God that Christians and Jews believe in, and Christians do not believe him to be a Prophet at all.

Peace!

Answer 5

You have to be rational to accept Christ. If you are insane you can not. And these,

radical individuals or radical extremists,

over there,

are insane. I would dare say that some, if not most of them, are demon possessed.

SO,

is the Pope correct in his observation?

Jesus cast out demons before they were able to come to him.
The Apostles did the same before being able to see persons come to Christ.

Remember we are not wrestling with flesh and blood. This

IS

a Spiritual battle.

Answer 6

Pope Benedict's arguments are based on the same cafeteria-style picking and choosing what they're going to believe that they do w/ just about everything else: science, philosophy, etc. then spilling it on the world. His arguments hold no logic.

_()_

Answer 7

You cannot explain God through rational thought. If you could, then they wouldn't be telling people that "faith" is necessary, now would they?

Answer 8

That's his objection to Islam?? Brother...
You'd think he'd say his objection would be that Jesus is the son of God and the Christ who died for our sins and rose on the third day to overcome sin/death!! You'd think that would be his objection!!!!!!!!!!

†

Answer 9

i think he is correct