Faith, Reason, And Dialogue Between Islam And Christianity

[Sojourner]

So, one of my professors brought up a fascinating insight relating to Pope Benedict's Sept. 12 speech ... you know, the one that almost ignited worldwide riots? Everyone focused on the quote from Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus: “Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”

However, this quote was really only part of a carefully crafted argument, which outlined a fundamental difference between how Christians view the nature of God and how Muslims view Allah. Christians believe that God is reasonable, while Muslims view Allah as totally unbound by any restraint, even rationality.

I did a quick google search and [url="http://www.takimag.com/site/article/pope_benedict_xvi_and_islam_allah_the_irional/"]found an article on this topic here[/url]. The author says:

[quote]For a dialogue to take place, three conditions are necessary:

[b]First[/b], both sides must be interested in pursuing the truth, which requires acknowledging that there is such a thing as truth and that it can be known (or at least approached) through reason.

[b]Second[/b], both sides must represent their own positions truthfully (which also requires that those positions be expressed rationally), and without any intent to deceive. And

[b]Third[/b], each side must be able to take the other’s claims at face value, as truly representing the other’s position.

On each of these points, the Islamic conception of Allah presents a stumbling block. The work of the noted Muslim theologian and scholar Ibn Hazm is often presented as proof of what Northwestern University Professor Dario Fernandez-Morera has called ”The Andalusian Myth”—namely, that the high point of civilization on the Iberian peninsula occurred during the centuries of Muslim occupation. As Benedict points out, however, “Ibn Hazm went so far as to state that [Allah] is not bound even by his own word, and that nothing would oblige him to reveal the truth to us.” Allah is, in the end, pure will, not bound by reason—in other words, capriciousness is essential to his very nature. “Were it [Allah’s] will,” Benedict continues, “we would even have to practise idolatry.”
...
Few people, however, have explored the moral implications of the Muslim understanding of physical causality. To take Aquinas’s example, if I were to take this lighter and apply the flame to this sheet of paper, everyone in this room would assume that, everything being normal, the paper would ignite—and it does. It took no special act of God to cause the paper to burn; in fact, all other things being equal, it would have required His intervention to prevent a fire, just as He intervened when Nebuchanezzer threw the three youths into the furnace. According to the Muslim view, however, when I strike the lighter, Allah has to decide whether the flint will spark, and whether the spark will ignite the fuel. When I apply the flame to the paper, Allah must decide whether the paper will ignite. If it does catch fire, it is because Allah willed that each in this series of natural acts would occur; if it does not, it is because Allah willed that the paper would not burn.

So we conclude that Muslims have a non-Western, non-Christian notion of physical causality. So what? Well, what if this weren’t a lighter, but an airplane? And what if this weren’t a sheet of paper, but one of the towers of the World Trade Center? Then, if the plane, being applied to the tower, were to cause it to burst into flames and crumble to the ground, it would not happen because the hollow steel structure of the tower created a chimney that caused an implosion, or because changes in environmental regulations prevented the use of asbestos above the 76th floor, but only because Allah willed that the tower would burst into flames and crumble to the ground. The complete capriciousness of Allah with respect to the physical world leads to a moral fatalism. If Allah did not want the towers to fall, he would not have made them fall. To Muslims who understand this--both in the United States and worldwide--the fact that the towers fell was a clear signal that Allah approved of the actions of the September 11 hijackers.
...
Just as Christians believe that we are made in the image and likeness of God, Muslims see themselves as a reflection of Allah. And as we wish to conform our will to God’s Will, they attempt to conform their wills to Allah. But here, the similarities end. If Allah’s will, unlike God’s, is not bound up with rationality, then the discerning of that will takes a very different shape. In attempting to understand God’s Will, Christians can turn to the world around us, to natural law, to history, to tradition. We see the rationality—the consistent reasonableness—of God’s Will in the world that He created. But in Islam, the appearance of order is only that—an appearance. To the extent that the created world seems rational, it is only because Allah wishes it to appear so. His will could change at any moment, however—and the new order, or lack thereof, that he would create would be just as “right” as this one.

Which brings us back to Regensburg. Pope Benedict’s address was only 16 paragraphs long; and contrary to the impression given by the media, only the first four paragraphs directly concerned Islam. The other 12 are a philosophical and historical meditation on, in the Holy Father’s words, “the profound harmony between what is Greek in the best sense of the word and the biblical understanding of faith in God.” Turning to Saint John the Evangelist, Pope Benedict declares that John “spoke the final word on the biblical concept of God” when he declared that “In the beginning was the logos, and the logos is God.” In other words, the final word on the biblical concept of God is a Greek word, and one of paramount importance in Greek philosophy. In English translations of this passage, we normally render logos as word: “In the beginning was the Word.” But logos, Pope Benedict reminds us, also means reason. “In the beginning was Reason"—not the modern, narrow, scientific conception of reason, which places reason at odds with faith, but the classical and medieval conception of reason, which accepts faith as the “evidence of things not seen.”
...
Is there, then, any hope for a true dialogue between Christianity and Islam? Yes, and it lies in the fact that, in one sense (and perhaps in this sense alone), all men are created equal: God, in His love and mercy, has written His Law on their hearts. Muslims, like all men, no matter what they believe dogmatically, do not live each day as if Allah is capricious, as if the world could be remade at any moment and what was wrong will become right, and what is right will become wrong. Their recognition of this law may be veiled, as St. Paul, in Second Corinthians, declared of the children of Israel: “12 Having therefore such hope, we use much confidence: 13 And not as Moses put a veil upon his face, that the children of Israel might not steadfastly look on the face of that which is made void. 14 But their senses were made dull. For, until this present day, the selfsame veil, in the reading of the old testament, remaineth not taken away (because in Christ it is made void). 15 But even until this day, when Moses is read, the veil is upon their heart. 16 But when they shall be converted to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away.”

Pope Benedict understands that this inescapable fact of human nature gives us hope. At Regensburg, he invited not only Muslims but all of us to take the first step in revealing the law of God written on our hearts by awakening ourselves to the harmony of faith and reason—not the modern, narrow, abstract reason of the post-Christian West which has so much in common with the rejection of reason in Islam, but the reason of classical Greece and Rome and medieval Christendom. “It is to this great logos, to this breadth of reason,” Pope Benedict declared, “that we invite our partners in the dialogue of cultures.”

What he did not say, but which he clearly knows, is that, if our Muslim interlocutors do embrace this reason and reject their own voluntaristic conception of Allah, the dialogue not only can start but will be well under way: because, to return to the early paragraphs of Benedict’s speech, that reason is the Logos, and the Logos is with God, and the Logos is God. Entered into with the intention of seeking the truth, this dialogue ends only in conversion to Christ, the eternal Logos, the unity of Reason and Word.

“And the Logos was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we saw his glory, the glory as it were of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.”[/quote]
Interesting stuff ... the whole article is worth reading but it is long.

So I'm wondering what others think about the possibility of true dialogue between Christians and Muslims. With such a fundamental difference in how we view God and his relationship to the world I am skeptical, but I am hopeful now that some of the antagonism has died down over the speech that people will actually re-read what Pope Benedict said and begin exploring avenues for conversation.

Edited because I used the word "fascinating" roughly 5 million times ...

Edited June 28, 2007 by Terra Firma

[kenrockthefirst]

[i]What he did not say, but which he clearly knows, is that, if our Muslim interlocutors do embrace this reason and reject their own voluntaristic conception of Allah, the dialogue not only can start but will be well under way: because, to return to the early paragraphs of Benedict’s speech, that reason is the Logos, and the Logos is with God, and the Logos is God. Entered into with the intention of seeking the truth, this dialogue ends only in conversion to Christ, the eternal Logos, the unity of Reason and Word.[/i]

More importantly, if "our Muslim interlocutors embrace this reason and reject their own voluntaristic conception of Allah," they will have taken the first crucial step toward acknowledging Truth, which if honestly pursued, will lead them to the Logos.

[kujo]

Thanks for posting, TF. I am about to head out to work, but I'll chew on this today and I'll get back with my thoughts. Excellent article!

[cmotherofpirl]

here is a reasoned muslim response that was not as well publicized:
[url="http://www.islamicamagazine.com/issue-18/vatican-focus.html"]http://www.islamicamagazine.com/issue-18/vatican-focus.html[/url]

read the whole issue.

[Sojourner]

OK, the link is not working quite properly ... not sure why, but if you want the article you can go to [url="http://www.takimag.com/"]Taki's Top Drawer[/url] and look for the article "Pope Benedict XVI and Islam: Allah the Irrational."

[jeffpugh]

Good article, TF. It is a good insight on the mind of Islam concerning how their faith works. I think we have some chance for dialogue, as long as they don't budge things. Let's just say that they will come to the truth through reason, as long as they are willing to talk with sincerity and charity, and reason of course.

[Lil Red]

i believe the whole speech is now available in paperback form. but i cannot find anything online. i know i've seen it in the local Catholic bookstore though.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Lil Red' post='1305943' date='Jun 29 2007, 06:15 PM']i believe the whole speech is now available in paperback form. but i cannot find anything online. i know i've seen it in the local Catholic bookstore though.[/quote]
[url="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2006/september/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20060912_university-regensburg_en.html"]It's actually on the Vatican site. [/url]



Not too long. I think the article may be longer.

[jeffpugh]

I'm just looking through some old notes from a highschool class on world religions. I had a really Catholic teacher in that class, and he gave good notes. One thing I see is that the Sunni Muslims believe that Allah does things aimlessly., while the Shiite Muslims say Allah does not do anything without purpose... oy... big divide there...