جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « تنوع دینی » در نشریات گروه « فلسفه و کلام »

Suppose the supreme religion as a reality includes the whole life of every human being. In this case, it is appropriate that we go beyond a comparative theology depending on dialogue to give credibility to our existence while hoping to address the general issue of interfaith dialogue and its more precise form, i.e., deep interfaith dialogue that involves critical thinking, Emotional Intelligence, reciprocal cooperation, and unconscious presuppositions is of attention. We try to build an interfaith dialogue based on different religious conditions and complexities, the actual role of human beings in dialogue, and the bio-religion of religious people. Among the specified conditions of interfaith dialogue, we can mention an unfailing commitment to one's religious tradition, listening humbly and empathetically to the other, seeking why, from where, and where to go, being open, and establishing a mutual relationship. Interfaith dialogue, while facing the vastness of the issue of religion and different people, also faces the vastness of the structure of human beings. The dialogue of heads, hands, hearts, and finally, the dialogue of the lives of holy people are examples of this expansion. Despite all these conditions, it seems that the human being conversationalist has failed or not flourished, the act of dialogue, the remaining unsaid, the power of silence in a dialogue, the specific boundaries of religion or different religions concerning each other, and various descriptions and interpretations of religions can be influenced by many voluntary and involuntary factors. So, we should go back, and instead of the specific and powerful phrase of inter-religious dialogue, use the more comprehensive phrase of human being dialogue about religions.

The issue of religious diversity, the religious truth and salvation of the followers of religions is one of the important issues of religious studies, especially philosophy of religion. On this issue there are three viewpoints: religious exclusivism, religious inclusivism and religious pluralism. This study reviews Cantwell Smith's viewpoint about the issue of religious diversity. Wilfred Cantwell Smith (1916-2000) is one of the contemporary scholars in religious studies and one of the thinkers of the twentieth century with extensive knowledge in various fields of the humanities. He is one of the best historians of the twentieth century in the comparative study of religion. The Study of Cantwell Smith's works and his views on religious diversity show that he is follower of religious pluralism. Smith's life, personal beliefs and communication with people of other faiths is an influential factor in shaping his pluralistic vision. His experience with other religions, kept him from general thinking about the other religions, and he gradually came to the conclusion that they are not unsaved and without God; but their lives, just like Christians, has religious features and traits. Type of his communication and administrative and social activities in convergence Christian sects and followers of different religions, reflects his pluralistic spirit and thought. According to Smith's personal approach in religious studies, his emphasis on the distinction between internal and external aspects of religion, emphasizing on the inner aspect of religion, i.e. faith, personal faith and incapacity of others in approve or reject faith, his pluralistic view can be inferred. According to Smith, the study of religion is to investigate the meaning of the appearances of religion in the eyes of those who believe in it, study people's faith and survey persons, not study data. Smith believes that the concepts of faith and cumulative tradition should be used instead of the word religion. For him, faith is a personal experience or personal connection with the transcendent. The materials and visible subjects of religion are cumulative tradition. Faith is unique; but since faith has no form, except when expressed in certain forms, it is always diverse and varied. He likens faith to love. Love can be expressed in various forms in words and behavior and is at the heart of people and beyond these expressions. Cantwell Smith explicitly denies the theory of one true religion and believes in plurality of true religion. He also believes in the oneness of God (or the absolute reality) and denies the unbreakable bond between God and religion. Smith's view about the truth and salvation of other religions is also pluralistic. According to Smith, the truth of religion is the quality of one's faith. He believes that the saving truth is in all religious traditions and in every person with pure faith. According to him, all the words, actions, rituals and religious principles are tools pushing people to the sublime. He is opposed to religious exclusivism and put it in conflict with the Christian teachings. Smith also rejects religious inclusivism and believes that no religious tradition can fully know God. He argued that the salvation is in "human heart" and is obtained with "nostalgia and the love of God". In Smith's view, God can be known partially and there is no complete and definitive knowledge about God. Another Cantwell Smith's ideas, is "the unity of humankind’s religious history ", from which the equality of all religions or religious pluralism is inferred. The context of this unique historic process is one reality of faith and beyond this, is one God or the transcendent. The theory of the unity of humankind’s religious history indicates equality of different religious traditions that shape this history. Smith accepts the reality of religious diversity, and never says different religions are the same. He says that different religions (i.e. forms and manifestations of faith) historically linked together. In other words, religious history is unique; because different forms and expressions of faith around the world are linked together. The truth of all religions (i.e. the faith) is the same and the difference is in the cumulative tradition and all religions are equal in truth and salvation. As a result, Cantwell Smith based on the definition of religion, is a religious pluralist in religious truth and salvation.

One of the most important issues in philosophy of religion is religious diversity. Different view points have been offered in the encounter of the religious diversity from philosophers of religion. The purpose of this research is to examine and compare Alvin Plantinga`s theory as an exclusivist view and Allameh Tabatabaee`s theory concerning religious diversity. Allameh Tabatabaee by presenting the inclusivist view believes that all religions benefit from truth and savior, but Islam considered well-known to seal of religions, is more perfect than others. His most significant argument to support the inclusivist view is that the divine widen salvation requires all human beings in different culture and religions save. While Alvin Plantinga, by exclusivist attitude maintains that only one religion can be true and only its followers can be saved. He believes that truth and salvation is based on Christian's doctrines and teachings and considered Christianity as justified religion.

The purpose of this paper is to examine Plantinga’s Christian exclusivism in the encounter with religious diversity. According to exclusivism, Plantinga maintains that only Christianity is true, and whatever is incompatible with it is false. In this paper, it will be argued that the exclusivist position is confronted with some outstanding problems. Moreover, there is an inconsistency between Plantinga’s exclusivist position and his theory on warrant with respect to religious truths. Even if it can be consistent, has very limited function, that is, it is devoted only to Christian beliefs. If one can hold some key religious beliefs in Christian tradition based on basicality and without inferential evidence, why cannot a parallel case be true in other traditions, namely Judaism and Islam?