Pluralism Argumentative Analysis

A number of approaches to religious diversity has been discussed in class namely: Exclusivism, Inclusivism, Postmodernism, Pluralism, Contextualism, etc. After thoroughly examining the various universal and non-universal ways of approaching religious diversity, I have come to the conclusion that the universal approach of exclusivism is the best approach to confidently assert my religious perspective, while dealing with the variety of religions that exist. The choice was made over Inclusivism, Postmodernism, Pluralism and Contextualism. The limitation of these approaches shall be weighed against my preferred approach which is Exclusivism.

Who shared common backgrounds, common experiences and common realities. Religious freedoms develop experiences of a common existence which transcend beyond the individual but loom on the threshold of a collective body. Theological perspectives, rituals, and styles of worship emerged. This is why I ponder the negatives associated with religious separation. Since tearing down the bondage of segregation; the church has yet to experience a great surge of integration. James Baldwin, as well as many others, contend the most segregated day or hour in America is on Sunday. These words are spoken with much contrition, as to say there is something profoundly wrong with this situation. How can Christians call themselves Christians, yet separate themselves based on social and cultural differences during their hour of worship? The religious experience is not only a spiritual connection and oneness with God, but a collective oneness of self; viewing one’s own identity through the lens of cultural experiences. This is not say separation is an evil perpetuating religious divineness; but a necessity to maintain one’s identity. There is no solid foundation for religious integration; for

Denominations have such an impact on people within their sect that they actually set the rules the people live by. Such as is it okay to drink or is it not okay. Some argue that denominations have no part in one’s relationship with Jesus Christ. While one’s relationship with Jesus Christ is exactly that—a relationship between an individual and Jesus Christ, one’s denomination helps promote and lead you in your relationship with Jesus

I live near Montrose, Colorado, an inconsequential city of a mere twenty thousand inhabitants. Within this reasonably small town, a total of thirty-six distinct churches serve those who profess to know Christ. The astounding variety of denominations in the United States certainly evidences itself in Montrose. In stark contrast, these divisions did not even exist among the Christians of the first century A.D. Many denominational splits occur because Christians clash over authority or disagree on doctrine. I believe that churches should, first and foremost, recognize Christ as the sole head, avoid petty man-made divisions over slight discrepancies in man's interpretation of the Bible, and yet not hesitate to disassociate

My knowledge of religious pluralism has expanded and has helped me to look at religion in a different way. Religious pluralism is something that I believe my generation will further continue to enforce. On page 5 of the introduction, Eboo gives a great example of what pluralism stands for: “Religious pluralism is neither mere coexistence nor forced consensus. It is a form of proactive cooperation that affirms the identity of the constituent communities while emphasizing that the well being of each and all depends on the health of the whole. It is the belief that the common good is best served when each community has a chance to make its unique contribution.” I think that quote perfectly describes the multiple themes that both Patel and Brown hold in their

Pluralism is found in many ancient Indian traditions including Jainism, Buddhism, and the Advaitic interpretation of the Upaniṣads and the Bhagavad Gītā. Each tradition’s core values internally ground non-violence. In all of these traditions there is a multiplicity of world views and individual needs, overcome by a common goal of breaking free from bondage to reach enlightenment. At face value, these traditions appear to have opposing metaphysics. While the conceptions of what is achieved by freedom from bondage differ in form, these traditions all recognize a pluralism of paths to a common goal. This not only promotes tolerance, but transcends this to reach a fuller form of respect. It should be clarified that this respect does not, however, mean that these views are entirely tolerant or relativistic. These conceptions of pluralism simply require that each view must considered as one of the many sights which potentially have some truth to

Nash comprehensive argument provides some great insights on pluralism and how it’s a disadvantage to Christianity. Definitely Nash gives a comprehensive argument which provides us with some great insights on pluralism and how it’s an disadvantage to Christianity. He lay out his case in such as way that Christian worldview and it must be consider in order to make Hick’s Pluralism theory biblical accuracy. He expresses pluralism does not benefit Christianity; however it brings great risk. Nash expresses it in this light, “A loving God is a supreme being with known properties. As soon as we can legitimately ascribe any properties to God, problems arise for the pluralist,

Pluralism is the idea that in the world we have a free market of many ideas, religion, and philosophies. It also mean that there is not just one certain idea, religion, philosophy, or interpretation. Pluralism can be seen throughout the 1st century. In the 1st century there were various religions with all different beliefs, that can be observed in the New Testament. These religions can be generalized into five groups. There are the Graeco-Roman Pantheon, philosophies, worship of the occult, mystery religion, and emperor worship. I found it interesting to learn about different kinds of religions.

Pluralism is the claim that all the religions in the world are equally valid in their truth. Also, this view accept that there are multiple ways of having relationship with God and ways for salvation. Exclusivism, on the other hand, is the claim that only one religion is exclusively true and this religion alone offer a way for salvation. Exclusivism also states that if claims of other religions contradict this one “true” religion, then those claim must be false. John Hick advocated for pluralism. He claimed that knowledge of God can only be known as it is being perceived by the believer and thus claims about God are really claims about perception of God. He further went on to say that knowledge is influenced by experience, which is influenced

As we go about our daily life, remaining naïve to religious diversity will only set us back. Clearly, the diversity of religions of the world floods American history (Gross, n.d.). In addition, it has also brought about a strong tendency to display hostility toward different religious positions (Gross, n.d.).

The Holy Spirit can guide and we can use the Trinity as a model, but that has not prevented 2000 years of previous dissension. Harmon, understanding that the Trinitarian model is not enough, offers ten solutions for ecumenical unity. First and foremost, Harmon expects Christians to pray for unity and to pray for those who are in disunity (57-59). Secondly, Harmon believes Christians should embrace one denomination while being fully aware of others (61-65). Third and finally, our author encourages Christians to live out the Gospel with preaching and teaching as well as helping to bring God’s kingdom through social justice and environmental care (66-70).

In “On Religious Diversity,” Robert MacKim categorizes approaches to the variety of religious belief in three directions, such as Inclusivism, Exclusivism and Pluralism. Exclusivists believe that only their religion is the accurate one, and every other religion is inaccurate. Exclusivists believe that one set of beliefs is accurate and other ones a partially accurate. Pluralists believe that more than one religion is correct; they accept numerous passageways God. Pluralism is an exceptionally, strange concept. If there are multiple processes to reach God, and it does not matter what religion the person is, then why would there even be a religion, and so many disagreements between religions. Because most religions believe that their religion

Pluralism puts a security net underneath man's ability to completely understand the full truth. This soi-disant "wellbeing" net supports the individual to fall just in the event that the idea is followed to be a dishonest truth, or even set out we related to speaking express a part-truth down and out of greatest possible ability to hold of a definite truth. Influence on thought is the comparison, however a recipe covered by toughness and trusting openness doesn't compare religiously. Pluralism also goes about as a barricade for thinking more extreme on what really is relatively large, in doing as such this respects pluralism a surface thought, shallow inside and out. It welcomes an intermixing of different thoughts to wind up a part of its

The social question and the existential question of religions have always played a huge role in the implementation of individuals to communities and its connection to God’s or a divine figure’s plan in the universe. Therefore by comparing, contrasting and assessing the religions of Christianity and Hinduism this essay will seek to answer both the social question of human unity and the existential questions of human relation to a divine being’s plan for the universe.

I find myself in a daily struggle with God, fighting through my worldly mindset and constantly questioning and justifying certain aspects of my life. Personally, it drives me to seek wisdom in the scripture but I can see in large groups where the many predispositions might get in the way of a very personal growth opportunity. I know personally when it comes to group discussions I shy far away from being the center of discussion. I leave that business for those braver and more confident than I.