This is a discussion and dialogue on the issues surrounding religious diversity / pluralism. It was initiated by Jim Brinkmann. However, it is an open discussion and you are welcome to join in (click on “comments†above).
Submitted comments will be approved as quickly as possible. Thank you for engaging with one another in the great discussions of life, and for doing so with gentleness and with respect.
PROPOSAL: Tolerance, diversity, pluralism of views, all religions are on an equal par with what they claim as truth! There are many sources in our culture today encouraging tolerance, acceptance and approval of religious diversity. Diversity is often seen as being an end in itself, i.e. something inherently good. On the other hand, there are many religious factions, including those within the Christian camp, purporting that they and they alone have the truth, and the whole truth. “If you don’t believe what I believe, you don’t have the truth!” What about religious diversity? What is it? How does it work? Is their truth or meaning or usefulness in religious diversity? Can religious truth claims be justified or proven, or does it come down to one person’s opinions versus another’s? Is there even any point or value in examining the issue of religious diversity? What’s your view, and how do you substantiate it?
17 Comments on “Religious diversity / pluralism”
It is important to understand where others are coming from. However, I do not think we can pick and choose coming up with what we want from each one…
It seems we would end up with nothing.
My country is home to diverse races and religions, and our nation’s pledge includes this phrase “..pledge ourselves as one united people, regardless of race, language or religion…”. I think religious diversity is a reality, regardless of whether everyone approves or not, and that is even more so in a democratic society which promotes liberty and human rights like the US. However, accepting the fact that different people has different religions does not mean we subscribe to their beliefs, thus the word “tolerance”. Rather, we respect them as people and accept their intrinsic worth as human beings. By accepting religious diversity, we are focusing on similarities: “we are both human beings with the ability to choose what we want to believe”. This respect and acceptance is crucial if we want to create a harmonious environment in which we can discuss religion freely, and in the case of Christians, share Christ. Broadcasting the I’m-right-you’re-wrong mentality will breed a hostile environment where people are often too blinded by anger, hatred and prejudice to even consider the other persons point of view. Thus I am in favor of accepting religious diversity with goal of creating a conducive platform to communicate Christ.
1 Cor 9:19-23 “Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law. To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings.”
Marlys… I agree there seems to be, in your description of picking and choosing from other religions and sources, the possibility of adhering to some doctrine or belief just because it seems appealing for some reason, regardless of whether or not there is truth behind it. There is a phrase “Cafeteria Catholics” which refers to Catholics who pick and choose which religious doctrines or beliefs that they want to follow.But the same could be said of all religions and certainly including Christianity. And yet… how is it that we come to know something as true? Do we continue to hold beliefs for the entirety of our life just because our parents or our culture passed them on to us? I am interested in what you think regarding the possibility of our coming to appreciate or know new truth which we might learn from other religions. Is it possible for God to have revealed himself to others of different religious faiths in ways he has not yet revealed himself to us? Or perhaps, we have just not come to realizations of truth revealed by God to all and we in our faith tradition have just not yet picked up on that truth? Might other religions hold some truths which we do not? If that is possible, then maybe examining other religions regarding their truth claims might be a good idea.. but that would be a far cry from “picking or choosing,” I agree.
Amber… you have a good point when you refer to democratic societies which give equal legal status to all religious traditions, i.e. they are all “equal” under the law. That is a GREAT thing, in my view. It seems interesting, to me anyway, how we make a jump, of sorts, from the positive benefits of equal legal status of all religions, to equal justification, validity, or truth supporting those faiths. One might say “I have a right to my religious opinions” and that is so, but we want to assume that because all religious truth claims are equal under the law, that they all have parity, they are all on the same par, regarding the truth of their claims. This is a manifestation of the relativism that is so pervasive today, which reduces truth to preference. But again… how do we come to our beliefs; a different question might be: how should we come to our beliefs? How do we know truth?
I appreciate your wanting to engage others in a meaningful dialogue, as opposed to just attempting to win the argument. I’m valuing that as modeled by Christ more and more, and seeing that antagonism and hostility breed the same response. One thing that seems very important for Christians, and those of other faiths, is to distinguish between one’s religious preferences (style of worship service, rituals, etc) and one’s religious essentials (what is absolutely essential to one’s faith traidition.) Realizing what are preferences might lead to more unity within a faith; but the difficulty then is trying to decide just what is essential, e.g. is baptism by immersion an essential or is it an essential part of one’s religious faith?
Amber,
I agree with you on your many points, but do you sometimes feel that in our democratic country, the rules of religious freedom apply to everyone except Christians? In my public schools, parades, etc. it’s okay for kids to learn about Islam, sing about Hanakkah, but they’re not allowed to say Merry Christmas? Interesting.
Jim, you make an excellent point about worship styles. There are Christians that are appalled by contemporary worship music. Some that only believe in one kind of music, place to worship, style of prayer, minister must wear a robe, church must have stained glass, etc. This is just within the Christian realm.
Amanda – that is interesting indeed… why such a restriction? Is it a fear that by being too vocal about Christianity, the minority might get offended?
Jim – I agree that not all religious claims are equal. I believe that there is only one true faith, which is faith in Jesus Christ. The question is… how does one communicate Christ in a relative and pluralistic world? IMHO, I think being real is a good start. We don’t have to pretend we have all the answers just to make the gospel look good. It is good, and it’ll show if indeed we are obeying God’s Word and living it out daily. There is an interview on an offbeat evangelist in a recent Today’s Christian magazine. I quote:
“In Blue Like Jazz, Miller tells the story about a cynical radio host who challenged him to defend Christianity. To the host’s surprise, Miller refused. “How can I defend a term that means ten different things to ten different people?” Miller writes. “I told the radio host that I would rather talk about Jesus and how I came to believe that Jesus exists and that he likes me.”
After the show, the radio host, with tears in his eyes, asked Miller if they could get together for lunch.”
The reality is that we who have the truth are still struggling to understand the bigness and fullness of it. But in the midst of our struggles to comprehend things we don’t understand, we are being changed and impacted and blessed, that is the difference and we can welcome those around us to join us to experience God. How to make God real? Nothing beats a personal encounter with God and everyone has a unique experience.
With regards to religious preferences, I have come to understand that there are many oughts and shoulds in the church which are not even mentioned in Scripture. The NT contains very few specific instructions on how to do church. Most times, practices in the NT times e.g. holy kiss, it should be interpreted in the light of the culture then and the surrounding circumstances. I currently hold the view that a person’s motivation and attitude in doing something is more important than how it is being done, e.g. worship should be sincere and from the heart, although I am still trying to find the balance. So my stand would be to feel free to use whatever form of practice that communicates the significance behind the sacrament.
Sorry for the lengthy post. 😉
Amanda,
You say, “In my public schools, parades, etc. it’s okay for kids to learn about Islam, sing about Hanakkah, but they’re not allowed to say Merry Christmas?”
Where is this? Certainly here in Fort Collins this is not the case. I’d be very surpised by such a set of policies in any school or city, since it is obviously unconstitutional to single out a specific religion like that.
Gavin,
I have children in public school here in Fort Collins. This is very much the case. Every winter, there is a music program. There is no Christmas music, but “wintertime” music, but they can sing “Shalom,” “Dreidel, Dreidel, Dreidel” and songs about Kwanzaa. I’m not complaining about them singing about these things. But why can’t they sing “The First Noel?”
You’re right, it is unconstitutional, but I think it comes from the school thinking they are being diverse and fair to everyone, but they end up swinging the pendulum too far. Why is it that Christians aren’t allowed to say Merry Christmas? We have to say Happy Holidays? To quote you, is it constitutional to single out one religion like that, but it happens anyway. No one would ever tell Jewish people that they can’t wish eachother a Happy Hannakah or Best Wishes at Passover, even if a non-Jewish person is overhearing it. But it’s offensive when a Christian says Merry Christmas?
And they say Christians are hypocritical.
Gavin,
I didn’t mean the last sentence of my previous post toward you personally, but as a general statement toward those that I was referring to in the previous paragraph. I just wanted to clarify that!
Amanda,
“Shalom” and “Dreidel, Dreidel, Dreidel” are both about aspects of other cultures, but make no mention of religion. Comparable Christmas songs would be “It’s Beginning to look a Lot Like Christmas,” “Here Comes Santa Clause,” or “Jingle Bells.”
“The First Noel” is quite different, concluding:
Then let us all with one accord
Sing praises to our heavenly Lord
That hath made Heaven and earth of nought
And with his blood mankind has bought.
Noel, Noel, Noel, Noel
Born is the King of Israel!
Do you see why the school would be reluctant to have kids singing this? (I am sad that it can’t be sung, however, because it is so beautiful.)
None the less, I share your concern. Kids should be singing about cultural aspects of Christmas, even if they are kept clear of the religious elements. I teach in the Poudre School District and know some of the ins and outs of the district. I’d be happy to help you in working with your school to ensure that Christianity and Christian culture are not treated unfairly. I’m pretty good at doing that sort of thing without creating a confrontation.
I’m curious about your questions, “Why is it that Christians aren’t allowed to say Merry Christmas? We have to say Happy Holidays?” In what situation are you not allowed to say Merry Christmas? Are your kids told not to say Merry Christmas at school?
Gavin,
In my original post, I was more metaphorically referring to the politically correctness that our society tends towards. With all due respect, throughout many of your posts, you have a tendency to take things to a very literal point, when a lot of people are referring to things either generally or metaphorically.
That being said, I do appreciate your support in the school thing; however, if I felt it was that big of a deal, I feel very comfortable going to the staff at our school. When I originally referred to “our public schools and parades,” I was not necessarily picking on PSD per se. Again, I was referring to political correctness and being metaphoric. Perhaps that didn’t come across, and as an educator, I can understand how that would get your attention and cause you to respond.
Not necessarily to Gavin,
In regards to the whole “Coexist” idea, I’ve been thinking a lot about those that say, “I’m a person of science; I don’t believe in a god.” I have come across several scientists (i.e. professors of mine), some PhD’s, some with other degrees, that will agree that after all their research and learning, there would have to be someone to meticulously design everything. When you think about how intricately designed our bodies are, and how dependent each system is on the others to function. Not just the blood flowing into the heart, but from an electric point of view (nervous) and a chemical standpoint (hormonal/endocrine). If one thing is out of balance, so many systems can start to fail. I was in a Gross Anatomy lab once, and we were discussing just how intricate the body is. The professor, a man who was a man of science, said, “The human body, with all it’s complexities, is I believe, a house for a soul that is even more complex. Only a mighty creator could have designed such a science. Nothing like this just happens out of nothing.” I guess my point is, it doesn’t have to be one of the other.
I had an Anatomy professor recently that I believed to be an atheist. At least that’s what she portrayed in class. But I am glad to learn that she is seeking things out. I was working in the preschool area of Children’s Ministries at Timberline, and she walked in and checked in her daughter. She has a Master’s degree in Biology. And she has returned to church more than once.
I think as far as learning about other belief systems, it’s a good idea. For example, if I don’t believe in Islamic beliefs, it’s good to know why I don’t believe in them instead of just blindly not believing in something because people say not to.
I have a ten year old son who has been involved in Cub Scouts. I was a Cub Scout and continued on to become an Eagle Scout. I love scouting and there is no other organization in this country that compares to the Boy Scouts of America. However, BSA has a rule against atheists participating in scouting. Not a metaphorical rule, but actual enforced policy. I decided to ignore the rule and became a Den Leader anyway, but if BSA national finds out that I am an atheist they will bar me from volunteering with the organization. I have to hide my (lack of) beliefs in order to participate in a organization that I love. This is extremely painful for me. (I am reluctant even to post this because someone reading it might be able to figure out exactly who I am from the information in my posts and report me to the BSA. Please don’t.)
This is why when Christians claim that they are treated unfairly in our society I try to find out what specific unfair treatment they have received. I don’t want them experiencing the same religious discrimination that I face in Boy Scouts, and would like to help if I can. Fortunately, their persecution invariably turns out to be nothing.
I’d like to raise an earlier unanswered question regarding religious pluralism/diveristy. There are numerous reasons for religious diversity such as tolerance, respect for others’ views, etc. but what about the possibility that other religions may hold some truths which my religion, whatever that is, doesn’t yet hold or hasn’t yet discovered or realized. Is that possible? Or do we believe that our religion (let’s just call it the “home” religion) has not only the truth, but all the truth, and other religions (let’s call them “alien” religions) have no truth or some truths which we already have? In other words, is it possible for an alien religion to have true beliefs or knowledge, which the home religion does not have? For example, is it possible for Buddhism to have come to know certain spiritual truths of which Christians are not yet aware or certain? If this were so, and we came to be aware of this possibility, what would this do to our confidence in our own beliefs?
Hi Jim, I’m new to online discussions and I think I went out of point in my last posting. Let me try to give my opinion to your question. Hopefully this time, I get it right :). For the sake of those who are not Christians, let me put in my assumptions: (1) that there is only one God and salvation is only by Jesus and (2) there is the devil who tries to distort the truth by all means, including setting up false religions so men cannot reach God. I do believe that all major religions hold some elements of truth. Taoism believes in heaven and hell and in the principle of sowing and reaping. Buddhism practises virtues like mercy and practices meditation. Muslim’s Koran is similar to the Bible in many ways and they also believe in one god. But based on the assumption that these religions are counterfeits of the truth, it is not difficult to believe that they too contain morsels of truth. That is why many believe that all religions lead to the same end, because they all teach similar virtues. If one is producing counterfeit currency, it has to look like the real thing in order to get people to accept and use it. But I have heard that those who are experts in recognising counterfeit currency hones their skills by studying the real currency and being thoroughly familiar with it so that they can spot all the inconsistencies in the fake ones. So my take is that if Christianity is the truth, there is immense value studying the real thing in depth because it probably contain all the good things found in all other religions and much, much more.
Jim, perhaps you can share your thoughts on the questions you posed too? I’m interested to hear your views.
Amber,
Thank you for stating some of your beliefs and views regrading religious diversity. In the last few years I have come to an appreciation of the multitudes of factors and variables which, to some extent, have an effect on what we “know” or what we believe. To sum up several years, I would say that that there are numerous psychological, philosophical, and sociological (to name a few) issues that help shape who we are, how we function and what we believe. Does this mean that what we know and believe is determined exclusively by culturally-determined factors over which we have, at best, only limited control? Of course not; I assume responsibility for seeking and determining what is true and what is false, knowing that I can err with the best. I would hold to Realism, the view that there are truths that exist objectively and independently of us. I also believe that we can know those truths, but that part can be exceedingly complex and difficult. On the other hand, we are called to be as children. Here is a great example of yet another paradox. I appreciate the idea of religion as quest, put forward by C. Daniel Batson. Religion as quest revolves around the idea of an open, life-long seeking of truth in the religious or spiritual realm. This is opposed to a more closed attitude of having obtained the truth and it’s a done deal. One danger of a quest orientation may be being tentative about any judgements regarding truth and staying in a holding pattern, possibly for one’s entire life, avoiding any judgments. I believe I can know truth partially in this life but will remain at less than Absolute Truth and Certainty. That will come face to face with God. This quest orientation seems to parallel sanctification. 1 Peter tells us to have a reason for what we beleive. Our reasons can be on any on many different levels. Since I haven’t exhausted all levels, I plunge forward. I am intrigued by questions such as “How do we know?” and “How do we come to believe something?” These issues, I beleive, are central to questions of religious diversity. Christian inclusivism seems to be a viable position. One version of inclusivism holds that Christianity is basically true, once the essentials are distinguished from the preferences (no easy chore) and that Christ is the way. Allowance can be made for those who have not received special revelation, by their acceptance and what they do with general revelation. Some include non-Christians who accept general revelation with sincerity, living to the best of their ability in harmony with God, as “anonymous Christians.” I, like you, see the possibility of other religions having truth; if so, I would rather seek truth than merely attempt to justify my beliefs.I’m reading “The Philosophical Challenge of Religious Diversity”, edited by Philip Quinn. It might be a somewhat tough read, but it appears to be of substance, being composed of numerous philosophical papers on religious diversity. You might look it up, if interested. Seeking truth can be a double-edged sword of sorts, requiring effort and responsibility. Milk and meat can both be truth, but there is a time for both in their own season. (Will I never learn how to keep my entries to a manageable/readable size?)
This is off topic from what has been discussed here, but I thought you all would find this interesting, as I did.
My dad sent me the following link that was a woman of Middle East descent being interviewed by a Muslim psychologist. She claims no faith of her own, but what she says about different faiths is very interesting as far as terrorism in the world.
It will take you to a CNN type of newscast.
http://switch3.castup.net/cunet/gm.asp?ai=214&ar=1050wmv&ak=null
Amanda,
That was a great video clip… She brought up many issues relating to pluralism and how it is relevant today. My overall negative reaction to her statements is that , as she describes the actions of radical Islamic terrorists, she simply refers to them as ‘Muslims.’ That may be an inaccurate depiction, as there are many forms or manifestations of what may be viewed as Islam today, including spiritual Islam, socio-economic Islam, legalistic Islam, radical Islam, ideal Islam or as that intended by the Prophet and expounded in the Qur’an, etc. To simply refer to radical “Islamic” terrorists as being ‘Muslim’ may be characterizing a huge population in terms of the actions of a very small sub-population.
I thought it was very interesting that she suggested that in order to stop the war, the terrorists would need to re-examine their books and curricula. It wasn’t clear to me whether she meant that they were mis-interpreting the sacred texts, or that the texts were corrupted or somehow inadequate.
She does seem to be proposing more than pluralism, depending upon one’s definition, in that some see pluralism as having some basic common core elements in their views and this is what would serve as common ground. She seems to be taking a relativistic view in simply accepting all views, beliefs, and opinions. The problem arises, as it often does with relativism, regarding accepting the view that killing is okay if I think so for my particular cause.
This lady’s statement leads me back to the question: how can we know truth? The terrorists believe they know truth. The psychologist believes she knows truth. Many Christians believe they know truth. Is truth simply whatever one believes? Do contradictory or incompatible “truths” exist, and if so, how does that work? How do we determine what truth is? Does it make sense to even try?
Jim,
Regarding comment #12 above, you questioned the “possibility that other religions may hold some truths which my religion, whatever that is, doesn’t yet hold or hasn’t yet discovered or realized.”
I think this is a great question. I appreciate Kreeft & Tacelli’s categories in their book, “Handbook of Christian Apologetics.” The authors suggest 5 questions which we must ask ourselves about other religions:
(1) Are they true?
(2) Are they good (moral)?
(3) Are they salvific? (Can they save you?)
(4) Are they educative? (Can Christians learn from them?)
(5) Are they useful? (Should Christians practice things in them?)
It seems as though your question touches on (1) & (5).
Regarding the truth question (“Are other religions true?â€), I would answer “yes†and “no.†I can’t imagine any religion or philosophical system which is not true in part. Even the worst of all religious views (Satanism) has some truth in it. For instance, it teaches that Satan is a real being of malevolent or malicious will. If you think about it, for a lie to really work it has to have at least an ounce of truth to it. So, if there is some truth even within Satanism, how much more truth is there in a more compassionate religion like Buddhism.
Having said “yes,†I’d also say “no.†Because I am constrained by the law on noncontradiction (that contrary propositions cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time), I also recognize that God cannot be both personal (as in Christianity) and impersonal/nonpersonal (as in many eastern religious views). So, while I can affirm certain moral beliefs which Buddha taught, I cannot agree with his agnosticism on the question of God’s existence.
Maybe the best way to say it is that if Jesus was the Divine Son of God, then I must disagree with any religion/philosophy insofar as it disagrees with Jesus. After all, the role of Divine Son of God carries with it the characteristic of having the corner of the market on truth (omniscience). Nevertheless, I may also agree with another religion wherever there is overlap and agreement with Jesus.