Interreligious Dialogue Essay Example for Free

Interreligious conversation EssayDialogue with respect to theo pellucid pluralism Statistics show that most of the worlds population is machine-accessible with some type of holiness, with Christianity and Islam encompassing slightly over 50% of the population. Though interreligious dialogue is beneficial in gaining a better understanding of others piety, is it possible to hold ones theology as universe the absolute law while engaging in an open interreligious dialogue with another religion?M whatever spiritual people give operate to be theological exclusivists, because a push-down storage of the religions be divided and differ in m any(prenominal) ways from one another, except they must assent the values and printings of other people if they are to re main(prenominal) truly faithful to the conviction of their traditions. Interreligious dialogue in a broad sense is being in communication with someone of a different religion to increase the understanding of ones o wn religion or tradition as advantageously as others. Since half of the worlds population is either Christian or Muslim, we will push a look into the differences these religions cares.One of the main issues is developed in Klostermaiers book, In the Paradise of Krishna. It exemplifies some of the differences religions tend to hold, such as the discussion between Muslims and Christians on where the role of deliveryman stands in Senestant 2 friendship to immortal. Muslims agree that savior was an important figure and served a purpose as a great teacher of righteousness, but fail to inspect his true connection with paragon the sky pilot. They claim that he is merely a prophet sent by graven image but not equal to deity.The position Klostermaier takes on Jesus, or Son of Man, is that he is the movement towards beau ideal in every being. He is what ultimately on the wholeows for us to pay back a race with god. The Son of Man plainly makes use of two basic distinctions M y Father on the one side everything else on the other. He doesnt judge people based sour of other peoples judgment or the rules set by man, rather he decide people based on their relation to the Father. Klostermaier as well wants us to recognize that Christ is not an avatara. in that location were many people before Jesus time who were sent on this earth to save Gods people from particular calamities that were caused by mankind. Those people were very important because they were chosen by God to do his will. Noahs obedience to Gods command to salvage manity by construct an arc to withstand the flood or Moses standing up to the Pharaoh and andowing his people to be set sluttish are just a few instances of Gods sons who assisted in salvation. Saying Jesus is the Only Son of God is putting a limitation on the abilities of God and not recognizing his full(a) power.It also confuses the Muslim sect because of their belief that God sent many people throughout register who were a source of deliverance from any disaster that was occurring at the time. They are referred to as prophets on that pointfore Jesus must also be a prophet and nothing more. Instead, he wants us to look at Christ as the movement to God Senestant 3 that will grant us ultimate salvation. He is the deciding factor that will determine whether we will enjoy eternity in the promise bring or feel the wrath of God as we torment in hell.A second main issue in the book is dialoguing on a daily basis with familiar and unfamiliar religions. onward dialoguing with other people, its crucial to carry a great understanding on your own religion. Its very important to study and learn what your beliefs are engrafted upon, although its very time consuming and doesnt aid in spiritual progress. While it is good to study and familiarize yourself with the religion you are presently practicing, it is also beneficial to converse with others about your religion as well.People tend to hardly see whats on t he surface because they are uneducated and misguided on certain areas and fail in attempting to delve deeper to find the true meaning of things. As you enter into dialogue with someone of an opposing religion, you must be very open-minded and unbiased to allow each other to learn things that arent intelligible at first glance. It allows for a different perspective of who you think you are and helps you identify if youre reinforcement and acting according to your beliefs. Its also important to have inner dialogue with yourself.Meditating and reflecting on the extend to our religion have in our lives and in our hearts. Is the essence of Hindiism and Christianity or any other religion we proclaim just words coming out of our mouths or does it directly impact our lives and allows us to live in peace and unity? These are the questions we must ask ourselves in helping to determine if were life history in fallacy and wasting our time, or if were in accordance to Senestant 4 our belie fs. A esurient old Brahmin talked about four kinds of people praying some pray that God should preserve their wealth, others that God should give them wealth.Those who asked for heavens were better but those who neither had nor wanted riches and did not ask for heaven, but only wished to serve God for his own sake, they were the best. (Klostermaier 95) Those people who only wished to serve God know of his glare and splendor and being connected to that will enhance their spirituality and respect for man and not traditions. This allows anyone from any religion to be watch like brothers and sisters. If we insisted on our theologies you as a Christian, I as a Hindu we should be fighting each other.We have found one another because we probed more deeply, towards spirituality. (Klostermaier 99) A troika issue in the book is the idea of three persons in one God. Many established religions raft God as being absolute and indescrib fitted because of how minute we are compared to God. Ot her religions are able to grasp the physical nature of God and give him attributes and qualities which can only be possible if this God was visible. However, Christians hold the position that God is both of these things and can go between each form when necessary. This is seen by God revealing himself through his son Jesus Christ.Through him were able to be sustain link up and have understanding of where our beliefs lie. When other religions look at Christianity, they view it as a religion without any real philosophy and that it has taken its teachings from everywhere and justifies them by claiming to possess the only true revelation, to Senestant 5 spread the only salvation (Klostermaier 29). Therefore they see it as being immature when relating to religion. They even go as far as saying theyre uneducated on their religion therefore they cant hold intelligent conversations and go in depth on the non-homogeneous issues that involve religion.I found this to be very true because as a Christian myself, I attempted to discuss religion with one of my atheist friends. After a few minutes went by, I realized I didnt know as much as I thought. It led me to examining what I believed in and why. Towards the end of the conversation, I grew more respect for people who werent adapted to a particular religion and understood theres a lot that can be learned from them. It showed me the unimportance of the different sects of religion and only claiming to a religion without close examination of it will lead to immaturity and idiocy.As a Sikh professor in Klostermaiers book says, Religion cannot be proved by logic religion is inner experience. (Klostermaier 31) This inner experience is affirmed through meditation as well as the various acts of people around you whom you have no association with. When looking at theological exclusivism versus pluralism, it is confusing as to whether they are relevant in deciding whether to converse with people of different religions. Looking only at theological exclusivism, it is the theological position that holds to the finality of the Christian faith in Christ.The finality of Christ performer that there is no salvation outside the Christian faith. By definition, exclusivism seems to be self-contradictory. It contains the fact that Senestant 6 human beings are limited in the amount of knowledge they have and are unable to understand the infinite(God) to its fullness. However, followers of this concept are not restricted in believing that they are the only people that have the ability to be connected to God. They look at people of other religions as being infidels, not actually having a religious belief.They also claim to be the ones most devoted to God, when in all actuality they are just followers of religious doctrine, created by man. Though the Bible was created by man, it was said to be created through spiritual guidance of the Most High. Every religious person who looks at the Bible sees it as being full of tru th, which by nature is exclusivist. So everyone who follows the rules and guidelines the Bible have set in correct is partially exclusivist. Since the Bible is considered as be exclusivist, it is only right to dwell on some of teachings it dialogue about.It talks about a God, who is full of mercy and compassion, one who loves all of his children and continues to love them through all the sins they have committed and continue to commit. It is a God that loved us so much that, he gave his one and only begotten Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. (Stoughton 897) A God of this nature does not sound like a God that will only come to save those who believe in Christ. Although that was his only begotten son, they are many people who do not have the opportunity to believe in such a religion. This can be caused by the way the person was rought up, or where the person was brought up, in which case Christianity was not the religion of choice. They are a lso instances of when someone dies prematurely and does not Senestant 7 have the opportunity to have a true relationship with Christ Jesus. These people shouldnt be and are not exempt from the sanctifying grace of God. This is a God who created all of mankind in his image and likeness, so that everyone will have the ability to be saved. God must be seen at the center of religions / The pluralistic contention is that all religions are fundamentally the comparable though superficially different. (Hick 42) The pluralist believes that the world religions are true and equally valid in their communication of the truth about God, the world, and salvation. This is also backed by the Larousse Dictionary of Beliefs and Religions, which says that other religions possess validity and truth in their own right / These religions are understood as different cultural reflections or expressions of the same portend reality and as such constitute legitimate ways to God (Larousse 437). This seems to m ake the most logical sense because we are not sole-bearers of the truth.We were only created to praise and give worship to the Almighty. Since this is true, we will all have our own understanding and interpretations about who God is, what our place is in this world and why we were created, and the steps in receiving salvation. At the core of our beliefs we hold the same truths, but slightly differ in minor details. most examples are the day in which we should attend mass or how often we should pray. Yes these things are important and are what gives meaning to our life, but God only requires us to recognize who he is and the impact he has in our lives. By whatsoever way men worship Me, even so do I gestate them for, in all ways, O Partha, men walk in My path. Senestant 8 (Bhagavad-Gita 4. 11) God is evident in all religions that have him in its center. As long as his followers stay true to the doctrine their religion provides, God will have favor on them. Many of the religions out there share these commonalities so they should be treated with equality when evaluating their doctrine with respect to God. In the sense of interreligious dialogue, the idea of being a theological exclusivist is irrelevant.It does not bring anything meaningful to the table when people of two different religions come together. Rather it would just be hurtful banter between the opposing religions and nothing worthwhile will be accomplished. Since by definition, an exclusivist can only view their religion and belief as being the only one which holds the absolute truth, to deviate from this by indulging in conversations that can potential alter that belief is dangerous and when placed in a position like that, mockery will be imminent. The only way the strengthen interreligious dialogue is through a pluralist outlook.They both go hand in hand, in that a pluralist will be very open to dialogue. This will increase their knowledge of not only the other persons religion but also ones own, s ince they both rootage from the same root. Senestant 9 Works Cited 1)Goring, Rosemary, Frank Whaling, John Marshall, and David Brogan. Larousse Dictionary of Beliefs and Religions. Edinburgh Larousse, 1994. Print. 2)Lopresti, Matthew. INTER-RELIGIOUS DIALOGUE AND RELIGIOUS PLURALISM A philosophical Critique of Pope Benedict XVI and the Fall of Religious Absolutism (Matthew LoPresti) Academia. edu. how-do-you-do Pacific University Academia. du. Hawaii Pacific University. Web. 14 Dec. 2011. . 3)Marbaniang, Domenic. Theology Of Religions Pluralism, Inclusivism, Exclusivism Earthpages. org. Earthpages. org. Web. 14 Dec. 2011. . 4)Bhagavadgita. Lewiston, N. Y. u. a. Edwin Mellen Pr. , 2010. Print. 5)Klostermaier, Klaus, and Antonia Fonseca. In the Paradise of Krishna Hindu and Christian Seekers. Philadelphia Westminster, 1969. Print. 6)Hick, John. God and the man of Faiths Essays in the Philosophy of Religion. Basingstoke Macmillan, 1988. Print. 7)NIV Bible. London Hodder Stou ghton, 1997. Print.