Religious Difference and Christian Theology

2020 ◽  
pp. 21-40
Author(s):  
John J. Thatamanil
Keyword(s):  
Religious Diversity ◽  
The Other ◽  
Christian Theology ◽  
Comparative Theology ◽  
Constructive Theology ◽  
Religious Difference ◽  
Religious Others

This chapter introduces and frames the argument for the entire book: Christian theology must understand religious diversity as promise rather than as problem. The chapter then proceeds to lay out conceptually what was articulated allegorically in the introduction, namely that theology of religious diversity, comparative theology, and constructive theology must be integrated. The chapter defines the scope and tasks of each of these three subfields within theology and puts them into conversation. The chapter argues that it is not enough to merely think about others; we must instead think with religious others and think through what is so learned. In sum, we ought not give an account of the other without being transformed by the other through interreligious learning.

Circling the Elephant

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
John J. Thatamanil
Keyword(s):  
Religious Diversity ◽  
Ultimate Reality ◽  
Christian Theology ◽  
Comparative Theology ◽  
Constructive Theology ◽  
Religious Truth ◽  
The Past ◽  
Religion And Race

Christian theologians have, for some decades, affirmed that they have no monopoly on encounter with God or ultimate reality; other religions also have access to religious truth and transformation. If so, the time has come for Christians not just to learn about but also from their religious neighbors. Circling the Elephant affirms that the best way to move toward the mystery of divinity is to move toward the mystery of the neighbor. In this book, Thatamanil employs the ancient Indian allegory of the elephant and blindfolded men to argue for the integration of three, often-separated theological projects: theologies of religious diversity, comparative theology, and constructive theology. Circling the Elephant also offers an analysis of why we have fallen short in the past. Interreligious learning has been obstructed by problematic ideas about “religion” and “religions.” Thatamanil also notes troubling resonances between reified notions of “religion” and “race.” He contests these notions and offers a new theory of the religious that makes interreligious learning both possible and desirable. Christians have much to learn from their religious neighbors, even about such central features of Christian theology as Christ and Trinity. This book proposes a new theology of religious diversity, one that opens the door to true interreligious learning.

Introduction: Revisiting an Old Tale

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
John J. Thatamanil
Keyword(s):  
Religious Diversity ◽  
The Other ◽  
Comparative Theology ◽  
Constructive Theology

This chapter introduces, reformulates, and defends the old Indian allegory of the blind men and the elephant to argue that, despite critiques, it remains a valuable tool for thinking about religious diversity. Appealing to John Hull, theologian of blindness, the book reformulates the ancient tale as one about blindfolded men and the elephant. After reformulating the tale, the author puts it to new uses. He argues that theology of religious diversity is the work of accounting for why there are so many different accounts of the elephant, comparative theology is the work of actually walking over to another side of the elephant, and constructive theology is the venture of actually redescribing the elephant in light of the other two tasks. This chapter argues that all three tasks must be done together.

God as Ground, Singularity, and Relation

2020 ◽  
pp. 213-248
Author(s):  
John J. Thatamanil
Keyword(s):  
Religious Diversity ◽  
Ultimate Reality ◽  
Comparative Theology ◽  
Constructive Theology ◽  
Divine Life ◽  
The Trinity

This chapter is the culmination of the book. What previous chapters called for—the integration of theology of religious diversity, comparative theology, and constructive theology—this chapter performs. It offers a new constructive theology of the trinity, a theology of the trinity that is worked out with the help of Hindus and Buddhists. Such a theology is simultaneously a way to think about religious neighbors, a way of learning from those neighbors, and a way to reimagine the divine life. Specifically, this chapter advocates an account of God/ultimate reality as ground, singularity, and relation. Although these features of the divine life can be discerned across traditions, this chapter argues that certain strands of particular traditions focus on one account of ultimacy at the relative expense of others. But this degree of focus is precisely what makes interreligious learning possible, necessary, and rewarding.

Comparative Theology After Religion?

2020 ◽  
pp. 108-151
Author(s):  
John J. Thatamanil
Keyword(s):  
Critical Race Theory ◽  
Religious Diversity ◽  
Christian Theology ◽  
Comparative Theology ◽  
Critical Race ◽  
Race Theory ◽  
Theories Of Religion ◽  
The Way

This chapter employs genealogy of religion, critical race theory, and Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka Buddhism to call into question the way in which uninterrogated notions about “religion” and “religions” compromise theologies of religious diversity. At the heart of the argument is the claim that both the categories “religions” and “races” were invented to reify traditions and peoples over against each other and to develop hierarchies of valuation. Reification is the precondition for ranking, and where there is reification there can be no learning. These reifications persist and complicate and compromise theologies of religious diversity and comparative theology. If Christian theology is to take up the project of interreligious learning, then a variety of extant theories of religion must be called into question. Nevertheless, the chapter concludes that there is no way to simply jettison “religion” and “religions.” These categories must be given new meaning.

Tolerance is theoretical and practical principles

1996 ◽  
pp. 13-23
Author(s):  
Mykhailo Babiy
Keyword(s):  
Religious Diversity ◽  
The Other ◽  
Nodal Points ◽  
Characteristic Features ◽  
The One ◽  
Ukrainian Society

Political ideological pluralism, religious diversity are characteristic features of modern Ukrainian society. On the one hand, multiculturalism, socio-political, religious differentiation of the latter appear as important characteristics of its democracy, as a practical expression of freedom, on the other - as a factor that led to the deconsocialization of society, gave rise to "nodal points" of tension, confrontational processes, in particular, in political and religious spheres.

Finding the Rights Questions about Religious Diversity

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 76-87
Author(s):  
Rita M. Gross
Keyword(s):  
Religious Diversity ◽  
Spiritual Disciplines ◽  
The Other

This article argues that all current theologies of religion share the presupposition that differences among religions are a problem, even a mistake, and that unity or agreement would be preferable to difference and religious diversity. But theologians of religion need to start at the other end of the puzzle, conceding from the get-go that religious diversity is here to stay, is inevitable, normal, natural, and, therefore, not the major problem or issue. The important questions are not about them, the others who are different from us, but about us. Why do we dislike diversity so much? Why does it make us so uncomfortable? Why does difference so frequently elicit the response of ranking the different options hierarchically? And, most important of all, how can we cure our own discomfort with diversity? The article also suggests that we need to practice the spiritual disciplines that help us overcome our egocentric preferences for a world in which everyone else would be just like us and can, instead, live comfortable in a world that accommodates vast differences.

Using Hevruta to Do and Teach Comparative Theology

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Devorah Schoenfeld ◽  
Jeanine Diller
Keyword(s):  
Traditional Method ◽  
Learning Objectives ◽  
Comparative Theology ◽  
Religious Difference ◽  
Scriptural Reasoning ◽  
Methods Of Learning ◽  
Classroom Use

The traditional method of study known as hevruta is the foundation of traditional Jewish methods of learning as practiced in the yeshiva. This method has been articulated as Scriptural Reasoning in a way that emphasizes the practice of engaged reflection on a text. In this chapter, the authors will attempt a different articulation based on the use of this method in their classrooms, an approach that emphasizes disagreement. When disagreement is placed at the center of the process, the hevruta method becomes a tool for encountering and learning from religious difference. The chapter provides an overview of and rationale for using hevruta, a treatment of learning objectives, suggested steps for classroom use, sample questions, and a discussion of hevruta and comparative theology.

Masao Abe and Comparative Theology

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leo D. Lefebure
Keyword(s):  
Graduate Students ◽  
Jesus Christ ◽  
Religious Tradition ◽  
Christian Theology ◽  
Western Philosophy ◽  
Comparative Theology ◽  
Graduate Course ◽  
Beliefs And Practices ◽  
Faith Tradition ◽  
Mahayana Buddhist

A leading form of comparative theology entails commitment to one religious tradition but ventures out to encounter another tradition, with the goal of generating fresh insights into familiar beliefs and practices reliant upon both the tradition of origin and the newly encountered faith tradition. This chapter, based on a graduate course at Georgetown University, examines how Zen Buddhist thinker Masao Abe engages in a dialogue with Western philosophy and Christian theology. Abe interpreted the meaning of the kenosis (emptying) of God in Jesus Christ in Christian theology in light of Mahayana Buddhist perspectives on Sunyata (emptying) and the logic of negation. The chapter includes responses to Abe from various Christian theologians, including Georgetown graduate students.

scholarly journals Another Name for Liberty: Revelation, ‘Objectivity,’ and Intellectual Freedom in Barth and Marion

Open Theology ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 430-450
Author(s):  
Kristóf Oltvai
Keyword(s):  
A Priori ◽  
The Other ◽  
Christian Theology ◽  
Intellectual Freedom ◽  
Specific Kind ◽  
Absolute Truth ◽  
Saturated Phenomenon ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract Karl Barth’s and Jean-Luc Marion’s theories of revelation, though prominent and popular, are often criticized by both theologians and philosophers for effacing the human subject’s epistemic integrity. I argue here that, in fact, both Barth and Marion appeal to revelation in an attempt to respond to a tendency within philosophy to coerce thought. Philosophy, when it claims to be able to access a universal, absolute truth within history, degenerates into ideology. By making conceptually possible some ‚evental’ phenomena that always evade a priori epistemic conditions, Barth’s and Marion’s theories of revelation relativize all philosophical knowledge, rendering any ideological claim to absolute truth impossible. The difference between their two theories, then, lies in how they understand the relationship between philosophy and theology. For Barth, philosophy’s attempts to make itself absolute is a produce of sinful human vanity; its corrective is thus an authentic revealed theology, which Barth articulates in Christian, dogmatic terms. Marion, on the other hand, equipped with Heidegger’s critique of ontotheology, highlights one specific kind of philosophizing—metaphysics—as generative of ideology. To counter metaphysics, Marion draws heavily on Barth’s account of revelation but secularizes it, reinterpreting the ‚event’ as the saturated phenomenon. Revelation’s unpredictability is thus preserved within Marion’s philosophy, but is no longer restricted to the appearing of God. Both understandings of revelation achieve the same epistemological result, however. Reality can never be rendered transparent to thought; within history, all truth is provisional. A concept of revelation drawn originally from Christian theology thus, counterintuitively, is what secures philosophy’s right to challenge and critique the pre-given, a hermeneutic freedom I suggest is the meaning of sola scriptura.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document