Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T02:13:00.807Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Do all Religious Traditions Worship the Same God?*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2008

Hendrik M. Vroom
Hendrik M. Vroom
Affiliation:
Free University, Amsterdam
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Do all religions worship the same God? Sometimes this question is answered positively, sometimes negatively. Various reasons are given. In the first four sections of this paper we will analyse arguments which affirm or deny that all religions worship the same God. We will see that different types of argument are used. Some authors base their answers to our question on their theological insights (section 1); others defend their thesis with reference to the results of studies in comparative religion (section 2); a third type of argument derives from the philosophy of religion (section 3) and a fourth from philosophical views regarding the ultimate unity of the world (section 4). After this survey we will deal with the structure of the various arguments given. What kind of argument is decisive? I will also make some comments on each of these arguments in order to develop my own. We will then draw our conclusion as to the kind of arguments which are appropriate to our theme (section 5). In the last section I will elaborate my own view.

Type
Articles
Information
Religious Studies , Volume 26 , Issue 1 , March 1990 , pp. 73 - 90
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See Ward, Keith, Images of Eternity (London, 1987), 84.Google Scholar

2 Knitter, P., No Other Name? (Maryknoll, 2nd pr., 1986), 80.Google Scholar

3 Barth, Karl, Kirchliche Dogmatik, 1/2 (Zürich, 1938), 304ff.Google Scholar; cf. 1/1 (Munich, 1932), 128ff., 40; Barth, K., Nein! Antwort an Emil Brunner (Munich, 1934).Google Scholar

4 See my Religions and the Truth (Amsterdam/Grand Rapids, 1989Google Scholar; transl. J. Rebel), 254ff.; Rahner, K., ‘The Existential. B. Theological’, in Encyclopedia of Theology: A Concise Sacramentum Mundi (ed. Rahner, K., London, 1975), 494f.Google Scholar; see his Schriften zur Theologie (Einsiedeln), V (1962), 137Google Scholar; VI (1965), 550; XII (1975), 80; XV (1983), 177; ‘I ranszerfahrung aus katholischer Sicht’, SzT XIII (Einsiedeln, 1978), 207–225.Google Scholar

5 These difficulties are overcome traditionally by saying that after Christ the norm for true knowledge of God is Christ. However, this implies a confusion of two different questions: (1) Do they all worship God?, and (2) How deep is their knowledge of God? If you answer the first question positively (‘They do worship God’), the further question is whether they know God well enough.

6 Wilfred Cantwell Smith, ‘Is the Qu'ran the Word of God?’, in Idem, Questions of Religious Truth (London, 1967), 55f.Google Scholar; see his The Meaning and End of Religion (1962; New York, 1964), 171 ff.Google Scholar

7 See Smith, W. C., Towards a World Theology (London, 1981), Part III: Theological, 105ff.Google Scholar

8 For Copernicus see also Kant, , Critique of the Pure Reason, Preface to the Second Edition, (London, 2nd ed. 1915, transl. Müller, F. M.), 693 (B XVI)Google Scholar; compare Hick, J., God Has Many Names (London, 1980), 51 ff.Google Scholar Numbers in the text refer to Hick's An Interpretation of Religion.

9 Hick, John, pp. 11, 17Google Scholar; Ward, Keith, Images of Eternity, 50ff.Google Scholar, 76, 80.

10 Kant, , Critique of Pure Reason, 112ff. (B 176f.).Google Scholar

11 Kant, , B 177.Google Scholar Cf. Son, B. H., Science and Person: A Study on the Idea of Philosophy as Rigorous Science in Kant and Husserl (Assen, 1992), 5ff.Google Scholar

12 Hick, J, ‘On Grading Religions’, Rel. Stud. XVII (1981), 461Google Scholar, in Hick, J., Problems of Religious Pluralism (London, 1985), 80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13 See my Religions and the Truth, 131, 139f.Google Scholar

14 See Kamstra, Jacques H., De Japanse Religie (Hilversum, 1988), 106, passim.Google Scholar

15 Professor Hick answered that, phenomenologically seen, they do not worship the same God; however, from a philosophical perspective he thinks that they intend the (same, one) Real.

16 See The Bhagavadgita (Harmondsworth, 1962 and repr.; transl. Mascaro, J.), IV, 11Google Scholar; Hick, , God Has Many Names, 5f.Google Scholar, 43ff., espec. 58.

17 Copleston, F., Religion and the One (New York, 1982)Google Scholar; numbers in the text refer to this work.

18 See my De Schrift alleen? (Kampen, 1979), 259ff.Google Scholar; ‘Contemporary Questions Concerning the Sola Scriptura’, Reformed World XXXIX (1986), 455–73.Google Scholar

19 Pannenberg, W., Theologie als Wissenschaft (Frankfurt a.M., 1973), 306Google Scholar; Theology and Philosophy of Science (London, 1976), 303.Google Scholar

20 See Strawson, P. F., Individuals (London, 1959, repr. 1971), 16, 21 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Idem, ‘Identifying Reference and Truth-Values’, in Idem, Logico-Linguistic Papers (London, 1971), 77Google Scholar; compare Bencivenga, E., Die Referenzproblematik, Her. von G. J. W. Dorn (Frankfurt am Main, 1987), espec. 95ff., 107ff.Google Scholar

21 Ansah, J. K., ‘The Names and Concepts of God Among the Buem and the Akan of Ghana’, in Scharlemann, R. P. (ed.), Naming God (New York, 1985), 86ff.Google Scholar

22 See my Religions and the Truth, 158f:, 184.Google Scholar

23 See also Barth's so-called ‘Lichterlehre’ Kraus, H. Berkhof-H. J., Barths Lichterlehre (Zürich, 1978), cspec. 35ff.Google Scholar

24 As comparative religion shows, Romans 1:21 cannot be applied generally to all religious traditions.

25 Dalferth, I., Religiöse Rede von Gott (München, 1981), 576.Google Scholar

26 Pannenberg, W., Systematische Theologie I (Göttingen, 1988), 78.Google Scholar