Pluralism Flashcards
(20 cards)
Interfaith dialogue
refers to cooperative, constructive, and positive interaction between people of different religious traditions or spiritual beliefs, at both the individual and institutional levels. Its purpose is to foster understanding, reduce conflict, and build peace among diverse faith communities.
Examples of interfaith dialogue
Scriptural reasoning movement in which groups get together to discuss scripture in a tame calm environment
Redemptoro missio pope John Paul second
Respect other religions and their views yet maintain and share that the way to redemption is through Jesus Christ.
Pros and cons of jp2 redemption
Pro - helps dialogue and acceptance
Con- as it still holds Christianity is salvation depth of conversation is limited
Paul eddy sharing the gospel of salvation
Wrote to the CofE about weather it was still the churches and Christian’s views to try and convert people to Christianity and hence salvation through jesuss
Gospel of salvation (cofe)
They created gospel salvation to say yes you should be open and loud about your faith that you should tell people about how salvation is through Christ however you should also do this by living a good Christian life and showing values of this in everyday life. And in knowing it is god who converts people not them for ‘making a sale! As conversion often becomes. Christian’s should not be afraid of being wrong or intolerance and should share the mission
Scriptural reasoning
Is a interfaith practise which brings people together to red and discuss different sacred texts and meetings are held in neutral spaces with a focus on openness and respect while focuseing on the text not general issues with the religion fostering respectful disagreement
Exclusivism
Exclusivism asserts that only one religion offers the complete means of salvation. In Christianity, this means explicit faith in Jesus Christ is essential for salvation, as other religions cannot provide a true relationship with God
Inclusivism
Inclusivism maintains Christianity as the one true religion but allows that non-Christians may attain salvation through their own traditions if they respond to God’s grace implicitly
Pluralism
Pluralism posits that all religions are equally valid paths to salvation, sharing core goals despite cultural differences in practices and beliefs
Narrow exclusivism
: Limits salvation to a subset of Christians, exemplified by Augustine’s view that God selectively grants grace to specific Christians
Broad exclsuivism
Extends salvation to all who explicitly accept Christ, regardless of denominational boundaries.
Hendricks kraemer narrow exclusivism
Hendrik Kraemer supports this by arguing religions are indivisible systems: one must fully accept Christ or reject salvation entirely, leaving no middle ground
Dacosta Broad exclusivism
Gavin D’Costa, though primarily an inclusivist, critiques narrow views by emphasizing the Holy Spirit’s role in revelation beyond institutional Christianity, advocating for a Trinitarian approach that acknowledges God’s presence outside explicit Christian frameworks
Karl Barth exclusivism
Karl Barth’s exclusivism stems from his foundational theological conviction that God is “radically other” and inaccessible to human reason or natural theology due to humanity’s fallen nature. This led him to assert that true knowledge of God comes solely through divine self-revelation in Jesus Christ, whom Barth identified as the exclusive mediator between God and creation
Anonymous Christian - Karl Rahner
The term “anonymous Christian,, describes non-Christians who achieve salvation through implicit alignment with God’s laws and ideas while practicing other faiths. Rahner’s inclusivism holds that God’s grace operates universally through creation and history, allowing salvation outside explicit Christianity. However, he maintained Christianity’s superiority, urging evangelism to convert “anonymous Christians” to explicit faith.
Anonymous Christian downfall
Condescending nature towards other religions
John hick - pluralism
John Hick’s pluralism reinterprets religions as culturally conditioned responses to the same ultimate reality, denying any single religion’s absolute truth.saying religious experience is interpreted in a way that is familiar and so that’s why it’s different and that we cannot triply know god
Problems with hicks view
.incoherenace
,irreconcilable differences between religious views surely can’t be the same divine god
Raimon panniker christin legitimacy
Chrustians they can recognise the unknown, mysterious dimension of Christ revealed in many different contexts and work towards developing in themselves a receptive attitude of love. Panikkar saw the second of these two choices as being more Christian as christophony which is Christ in different contexts being revealed to people so it is key to not let religious traditions hold you back from finding truth as god is love and mystery
