Interfaith

Jessica Kingsley Publishers, due 2016
Explores the relationship and dialogue between religion and atheism, focusing upon Christian, Islamic, Buddhist and other, e.g. Pagan, traditions in their encounter with secularism and atheism. It explores such issues as faith and reason, science and religion, gender and sexuality, 'texts of terror', and the use and abuse of arguments, evidence, and concepts.

By 1996 the tacit application of selected terms of the new constitution of South Africa and an unreported case regarding the Bible had effectively displaced the belief in the Bible by 75% of the population with a new state religion based on humanism

L’étude retrace les difficultés d’accès au concile Vatican II (1959-1965) pour les interlocuteurs juifs, qui contactent le Vatican au sujet du schéma De Judaeis. 
Ces difficultés s'expliquent par la forte asymétrie des relations, les juifs étant en position d'entrants. Vu les effets de segmentation dans ces réseaux, l’apport du moment conciliaire réside in fine moins dans les transferts d’idées entre représentants de groupes religieux distincts, que dans de nouvelles pratiques d’échange. Les relations entre représentants juifs et ecclésiastiques s'autonomisent des voies d'accès et des modes de discussion diplomatiques, pour donner naissance à une diplomatie interreligieuse. L'article se concentre ici sur les voies d'accès dont disposent ces interlocuteurs (mémorandums et discussions avec le Secrétariat pour l'Unité des Chrétiens, dont les théologiens chargés de la "question juive" étaient principalement des convertis) et revient sur les difficultés inhérentes à ce type d'échanges.

Cet article a été approuvé et publié par le comité de lecture des Éditions du CTHS dans le cadre des actes du 140e Congrès national des sociétés historiques et scientifiques tenu à Reims en 2015.

This short paper is adapted from notes for a talk presented at the Richmond Islamic Center, for their non-Muslim Neighbors, on April 16, 2022/Ramadhan 14, 1443.
The aim of the talk, and hence the paper, was to present the message of Islam clearly and succinctly to an audience of non-Muslims and to do so in a way that was sincere and authentic to the message and, at the same time, not meant as ”preaching”.
It is meant to be educational and, at the same time, an open invitation.
And with God alone is every success.

Religious communities play an important role in fostering justice and peace in societies. Religious belief can form an inspirational basis for peace and highlights the need for dialogue to build peace. A key issue for careful reflection is how religious identity interfaces with ethnic and national identity. Do these different facets of our identity complement or challenge or compete with each other? The complicated interplay of identities is reflected in the growing interaction between religion and politics, with many conflicts and tensions carrying consequently the imprint of religion. The “politization” of religion and the “religionization” of politics are flip sides of the same dangerous coin. However, the real tension in our world is not between religions and beliefs per se, but between aggressive, intolerant and manipulative ideologies. Such ideologies are used to legitimize the use of violence, the exclusion of minorities and political domination. The primary victims are often religious minorities, living in a context of a different majority culture. This study was commissioned in order to identify how best to ensure that religious minorities in Myanmar enjoy the same freedoms of belief as the majority religion, and to provide ACT Alliance members with a resource to inform strategy and program development.

In the context of significant numbers of Muslim newcomers immigrating to Europe and perceptions of failed integration in Sweden, and in light of the urban conflict and increasing debates about integration as a one-way or two-way street, this paper sets out a “communication for development”-informed theoretical framework that focuses on the struggle for social cohesion and immigrant integration in Malmö, Sweden. Unemployment and lack of power have taken their toll on agency among migrants—particularly Iraqi men— and the strongest stories showing immigration as an asset—particularly those of Iraqi women—are not being told in the media. Participatory communication in Malmö is currently less than participatory, and integration in Sweden, in its expectations, leans uncomfortably close to assimilation. Several examples are given of development communication initiatives for integration that have had positive results, with strong evidence that community media has proven effective at improving immigrant integration. Development communication initiatives show promise for improving social cohesion in Malmö, and these can be effective only if the choice to participate, and the choices of initiative, medium and content are made by migrants themselves.

The contemporary theological constructs of the Biblical and Hindu
religions are quite dissimilar. However, we find that 75 percent of the narratives
of Five Persons—namely, Adam, Cain, Noah, Abraham and Moses of the
Biblical religions and Swayambhu Manu, Indra, Vaivaswat Manu, Rama and
Krishna of the Hindu religion—are parallel. More importantly 82 percent of the
theological understandings at the time of these Five Persons are also parallel.
The parallels suggest that these two religions had a connection at some remote
time. They have evolved in different directions and today may look different.
We can enrich the contemporary theological understandings of these religions in
the sense of having a common heritage by examining their theological
understandings at the time of these Five Persons in the light of each other. This
can be the first step towards developing a deeper understanding between the
religions.

In this article it is argued that the Qiblah passages in the Qur’an, which are commonly understood as referring to the direction of the prayer, are directly engaging with and interpreting the Shema passages in Deuteronomy and their Talmudic commentaries. By defining and applying the method of intertextual polysemy, nine points of intertextuality are identified between the various Qur’anic, Biblical, and Talmudic passages. Against this background, the article implies that narrations from traditional Qur’anic commentaries are lacking in their interpretation of these passages, since they do not employ any extra-Quranic contexts to explain their meaning. Through the method of intertextual polysemy, the alternative thesis propounded here is that the historical reference for the Qiblah passages is the Shema.

While the contemporary world has been heralded as being “post-racial”, we can look all-around to see evidence that this assertion is not only flawed but false. Religion is generally blamed as the key culprit for the escalating conflicts igniting the world over which threatens peace. Yet, rarely is secularism and the void created in its midst carefully analyzed in this context. The historical roots of this problem are more remote than postmodernism and modernism. However, secularism has fractured the way that human identity has been understood throughout time which eclipses the integral relationship between human diversity and religious pluralism.

La revista entera está dedicada monográficamente a este tema de la doble o múltiple pertenencia religiosa (multiple belonging). El autor se remonta a su infancia –no saliéndose pues de las generaciones actualmente vivientes– para recordar que en aquel tiempo, antes del Concilio Vaticano II, esta pregunta era «in-audita», nadie la hacía, porque todo el mundo católico la tenía resuelta con una evidente respuesta negativa. Después recorre el pensamiento conciliar al respecto y, sumariamente, la evolución de la teología del pluralismo religioso en las últimas décadas. Su conclusión es afirmativa: se puede pertenecer a varias religiones, pero ampliando más todavía esa posibilidad, hacia unos horizontes de los que sólo nuestra generación dispone...

As Christians engage more and more in an interfaith dialogue with Buddhism, and other faiths, they are constantly challenged by a vocabulary, which is very different from the one they know and love. This is especially true in working with and studying Buddhism, with its non-theistic approach to understanding the nature of reality.

1968年5月1，甘易逢回到了他年轻时的学习地巴黎。在那里，他目睹了大批年轻人涌
上街头，举行声势浩大的游行示威。这位法国传教士刚从台湾归来，在台湾，他是研究
中国文化和灵修的著名学者。巴黎青年大胆地宣称上帝已死。然而，甘易逢认为巴黎青
年所摒弃的上帝与他已深入了解的东方的上帝是截然不同的。甘易逢认为，死去的不是
上帝，而是他们称之为上帝的抽象概念。东方的灵修在人的灵魂深处寻求神性，它可以
帮助巴黎青年从另一个角度认识上帝。“在东方待了二十年，回到法国在各地旅行时，
我对自己有了更深刻的认识。我似乎理解了中国的人文主义确乎比西方先进两千年。我
很想把这一领悟明明白白地说清楚，尽管我不知道该从何说起"
In May 19681, Yves Raguin returned to Paris, the city where he studied as a young
man. There he witnessed the boisterous street demonstrations by large crowds of young people. The French missionary was coming from Taiwan, where he was a well-known scholar on Chinese culture and spiritualities. The Paris youngsters boldly stated that God was dead. Raguin, however, thought that the youth rejected a God different from the one he had come to know better in the East. It is not God who is dead, Raguin thought, but rather the abstraction that they call God.
Eastern spiritualities, which seek the divine in the depths of the human, could have helped the youth of Paris to know God from a different point of view. “While travelling through France, I became deeply aware of whom I was, after twenty years in the East. I somewhat understood that Chinese humanism was two thousand years ahead of the West. And I wanted to state that, even if I did not know how”

Ar-Rayyân is reserved for those who fast. How can you make sure your fas is one that will bring you there? Will the family and society customs of Ramadan see you through, or is there a securer way? What does the Quran and Sunnah tell us about the best actions and the rewards for them? This essay is a gentle reminder and advice, hopefully beneficial for the month of Ramaðân, whichever year it falls in.

This book provides an introduction to the current state of the field for those new to interreligious dialogue and the theology of religions, as well as providing insights and new concepts that will be of interest to specialists. In particular, the current deadlock between pluralist and particularist approaches is re-imagined, and a strong argument for radical openness to the religious Other is advanced, based upon the resources of the Christian heritage. Also explored are many issues pertaining to debates in this area which are not always addressed, such as religious identity and definitions of religion. The book draws inspiration from many sources including intercultural theology, feminist theologies of religions, comparative theology, postcolonial identity theory, scholarly debates on the nature of religion, and biblical concepts of hospitality to outline its new approach. It concludes that we must seek mutual fulfilment with religious Others while maintaining Christian integrity. It also addresses the problems this involves when seeking ethical partnership across religious boundaries. No easy answers are given, however, a vision for radical openness based on Jesus’ example, the Christian heritage, and contemporary scholarship is endorsed.

Contents:
Leonard Swidler, Preface
Alan Race, Foreword
David Thomas, 1 Dialogue before Dialogue
Paul Hedges, 2 The Contemporary Context of Muslim-Christian Dialogue
Reuven Firestone, 3 Can Those Chosen by God Dialogue with Others
Khaleel Mohammed, 4 Lay, Institutional, academic
Anne Hege Grung, 5 Gender and Muslim-Christian Dialogue
Shirin Shafaie, 6 War, Peace and Nuclear Terror
Yusuff Amuda, 7 Shari'ah and Religious Tolerance for the Protection of Children: A Case Study of Nigerian Muslims and Christians
Jean-Daniel Kabati, 8 Peace-building through Interfaith Dialogue: The Democratic Republic of Congo Model
Douglas 9, Muslim Initiative and Christian Response: The Future of Dialogue
Ray Gaston, 10 Christian Responses to Islamophobia
Clinton Bennett, 11 Christian-Muslim Relations in the US post 9/11
Clare Amos, 12 Vatican and World Council of Churches Initiatives

In Syria, interfaith dialogue constitutes a public practice that speaks to ethical, social and political imaginaries. As an official practice, it helps to provide the regime with religious legitimacy, though unofficially it often functions as a euphemism for missionary efforts. On a more abstract level, a careful analysis of Syrian interfaith dialogue reveals that different ethical traditions inform the participants' vision of "good." The Muslim sheikhs in this case-study follow an Aristotelian model of ethics that presupposes pious individuals for the creation and preservation of a moral society. Accordingly, they aim at fostering inter-communal harmony by teaching people how to perform virtues, rather than teaching them about other religions. Conversely, the Christian priests share a model that combines post-Enlightenment rationalism with "Christian love," and thus they strive to advance tolerance by encouraging unconditional affection, intellectual and experiential awareness of others. Together, these discrepancies facilitate miscommunication among the participants of dialogue.

This paper analyses the responses of Evangelical Christians to “A Common Word between Us and You.” While many Evangelical leaders warmly welcomed the initiative and have subsequently been involved in various dialogues and conferences, others were more sceptical and refused to take part. This latter reaction reflects a general lack of trust in some parts of the Evangelical movement engendered by concerns over Muslim approaches to law, freedom of religion and conscience, the treatment of apostates under shari‘a and restrictions on Christian mission in Muslim countries. The debate between these two groups has been sharp and at times acrimonious, reflecting deeper tensions within the Evangelical community. Drawing on recent books, articles, blogs and the author’s own observations at an international dialogue conference, this paper highlights the tensions and examines some of the underlying causes.

To know well, must we know through difference? Can human beings know more through comparison with the other than through the most rigorous study of the same? Although there has been much debate on this subject, little concrete evidence has been offered either way. This study hopes to provide such evidence. To do so, we compare the Nataraja of Shaivite devotionalism and Picasso’s 1930 Crucifixion, reflecting on each work first in isolation and then in relation to the other. Through this comparison we will generate em-pirical data regarding the relationship between difference and interpretation. The study will conclude that excellence in interpretation is only achieved through the encounter with difference.

To ask whether the meetings between religious organisations, leaders, and members we call interreligious, or interfaith, dialogue should include atheists raises a number of questions. These include: is atheism a religion (or even, what do we mean by religion); is atheism a faith, or belief system; what do we think such dialogue is for; and, who do we think we should include and why, in particular raising the question of why we should include atheists. We could ask other questions, but for the sake of this paper I will stick to these four which will give us more than enough to chew over.

In this chapter I explore how Friedrich Nietzsche’s work The Anti-Christ inspired not only an unexpected charitable reading of Jesus’s life and thought in the New Testament, but also an unlikely sense of “holy envy.” I will examine how this unlikely sense of holy envy provides a unique opportunity for empathy in an American political context where political ideologies tend to be more divisive than religious or theological worldviews. The topic of Jesus is very tricky for Jews. In fact, the legacy of Christian anti-Judaism provides the hermeneutical lens for how Jews may interpret the life and teachings of Jesus in the New Testament. Incorporating aspects of Jesus’s life and teachings into a Jewish religious way of engaging the world, or even just appreciating them, can be an anathema to classical and even to many forms of modern Jewish thought. In this essay, I will explore the irony and power of how Nietzsche’s Jesus could inspire a contemporary Jewish thinker to admire and even connect to the Jesus of the New Testament.

It's our collective mindset that unconsciously non-Muslims around us are considered very lower in status, in fact, sheer inferiors. Some people behave not like being visited with them and feel unrest if they sit beside. People love to make fun of their presence and practices quite legally. Their backbiting is not thought as a sin. Even to some people hurting them is a rewarding act! If they are hurt, injured or even died in a number, people remain utterly indifferent. It is likewise a fact that when we get out our charity, we never think of them despite their severe poor condition or even if they ask us. Their ailment, poverty, adversities never bring sympathy.
Of course, with this mentality, all effort for harmony seems fruitless and vain. Hence, until this mindset is correct, we can never succeed in developing harmony with the non-Muslims in terms of religion.
This article will concentrate on the fundamental misconceptions regarding treatment and behaviour with non-Muslims. The details will highlight misunderstandings and the respective rightful description and teachings so that harmony and cordial relationship with non-Muslims are nurtured and peace may prevail in our society.
Keywords: Religions, Interfaith, Pattern, Scope, Love.

The subject matter of today’s discussion is ‘What is good and what is evil in the scriptures? I myself being a Muslim, representing Islam, my topic will be – What is good and what is evil in Islam? Or What is good and what is evil in Muslims’ scripture – the Glorious Qur’an? How does my Scripture define good? And how does my Scripture define evil?

(Draft Intro) We live in a world where faiths and cultures can meet with increasing ease. Whether it be directly through transportation of a kind our ancestors could barely have imagined, or virtually through dramatic advances in communication and information technology, a multitude of cultures, religions, beliefs and practices that are not our own are within close reach. More than this, it is not simply that we, in the West, can access these diverse traditions, but they are now living alongside each other as part of our communities. This latter phenomena is not new as almost every society throughout history has known of, been in active contact with, and been influenced by external social, religious, and philosophical systems. Nevertheless, the sheer scope and awareness of this diversity certainly seems new, at least within the Western world. As a result of processes of globalisation  we now live in multifaith societies. The development and impact of this phenomenon is what we shall explore in this chapter.
We will proceed in three main stages. First, we will look at the development of religious diversity within the Western world, often focusing on the UK and Australia as examples of an ‘old’ and ‘new’ world context but including broader contexts. Second, we will discuss the development of multifaith awareness. Third, we will consider the social aspects of living in a multifaith society. Finally, we will conclude with some thoughts and reflections upon these developments.

“You can’t just be left wing or right wing because you need two wings to fly.”
Rabbi Menachem Fromanז"ל

The quote above aptly describes the belief system of the late Rabbi Menachem Froman ז"ל of the ancient Biblical city of Tekoa which also happens to be considered a settlement by the international community.  Rabbi Froman sought to embrace the dichotomies which he exemplified by being a settler and an advocate of an independent Palestinian state, a founder of Gush Emunim  and a peacebuilder with all different types of Palestinians, even Hamas.  He had a special ability to see the depths of the reality in the Holy Land and know that the only way to solve the conflict between Jews, Muslims and Christians is to reach for the Abrahamic roots which unite them all.  This article will explore the multifaceted identity of Rabbi Froman and then look at his methodology as a peacebuilder.  Next, will be an explanation of the profound influence that Rabbi Froman had on the founders of the Abrahamic Reunion, Sheikh Ghassan Manasra and Rodef Shalom (Radash)  Eliyahu McLean who are actively carrying on his message today.  An additional organization founded by one of Rabbi Froman’s students called Eretz Shalom will show how the energy which physically left this world on March 4th, 2013 still fills the hearts and souls of the peacebuilders in the Holy Land.

In May 19681, Yves Raguin returned to Paris, the city where he studied as a young man. There he witnessed the boisterous street demonstrations by large crowds of young people. The French missionary was coming from Taiwan, where he was a well-known scholar on Chinese culture and spiritualities.  The Paris youngsters boldly stated that God was dead. Raguin, however, thought that the youth rejected a God different from the one he had come to know better in the East. It is not God who is dead, Raguin thought, but rather the abstraction that they call God. Eastern spiritualities, which seek the divine in the depths of the human, could have helped the youth of Paris to know God from a different point of view. “While travelling through France, I became deeply aware of whom I was, after twenty years in the East. I somewhat understood that Chinese humanism was two thousand years ahead of the West. And I wanted to state that, even if I did not know how”.
Later that year, Raguin began writing The Depth of God, his second book comparing Eastern and Western spiritualities2.  The title was carefully chosen: “I attempted the discovery of the ‘depth of God’ in the depth of man.… In English, ‘the depth of God’ immediately resonates with ‘the death of God’.  In fact, my thought expresses the passage from a humanism in which God seems ‘dead’, to a notion of man which reveals and manifests God in the depth of the human”.
      In his first book, Paths to Contemplation (1968), Raguin had written on ascendant paths toward God. The itinerary described in The Depth of God is the other way around. “The main theme of The Depth of God is that, when man discovers what man is, [he] finds God.... I can describe the process with these words: ‘Who knows man, knows God’.… The Depth of God is like digging a well in the heart of human being”.
      Exploring the way of interiority, Raguin proposes an audacious parallel between the rejection of God in the contemporary West and Buddha’s refusal to submit humans to a God imagined as an external Absolute. “A Buddhist may say that he does not profess any belief in God.…  He does not deny the existence of an Absolute, but he does not want man [to] feel he is subservient to it or related to it. He wants to make man totally master of himself. In a way this is the first known movement of the ‘death of God’”.  For the historical Buddha “to talk or think about God and metaphysical problems is a waste of time and energy”. Raguin suggests that the encounter between Christian faith and Asian religious traditions is possible on the path to interiority. A path that goes beyond the denial of God declared by modernity and leads to the “depth of God”.

When Muslims governed most of the Spanish peninsula (Al-Andalus), a very high civilization evolved. But both Christian and Muslim reactionaries attacked and undermined this civilization. Christian kingdoms sought to take back what they thought was rightfully theirs. Islamic forces fought on behalf of competing dynastic claims, and to purify their faith. In this short speech I contend that the synergism of diversity (La Convivencia, Co-Existence) and the repression of, particularly, reactionary Christians (La Reconquista, Re-Conquest) were always present, and that these opposite tendencies are present in our world today. This was a speech that I gave recently, and want to expand it. I plan to fill the gaping holes and provide sources and references.

A disagreement between two philosophers, William Alston and J. L. Schellenberg, on the matter of religious commitment serves to exemplify an important difference between religious believers and religious sceptics. The disagreement occurs in the context of a discussion over the plausibility of Alston’s doxastic practice approach as applied to religious belief. I argue that a close reading of Alston and Schellenberg shows that they do not, despite what they may think, differ greatly from each other. I conclude by drawing some lessons for interreligious dialogue, particularly that the focus of engagement should not necessarily be to convince but rather to uncover differences in attitude.

Mutual coexistence, cooperation and genuine understanding among different religious nations is a need for global peace and harmonious livings. And more so it is an urgent call today in India. We are facing communal polarization at its peak both on religious as well as caste basis. Our citizens are being killed, lynched and inhumanly treated by both religious terrorists and communal goons! Is it the India that the father of this Nation Mahatma Gandhi had dreamt about?

Today on his 148th birth university and in this International Day of Nonviolence we the Indians need to ask ourselves as what might have gone wrong with us? Why our country is gradually reducing into a boiling volcano?
     
Coexistence is a two-way effect. The parties sharing same interest should come ahead to understand each other. Need of the time is to utilize modern recourses while bridging gapes and making stronger relationship than ever before among all major religions being practiced in India like Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, Sikhism and Christianity.
Our strength is unity and our idea is ‘unity in diversity’. The more we enjoy this idea of India the more respectable and stronger we will be at home as well as in abroad. The modern fathers of this nation – Mahatma Gandhi, Dr. BR Ambedkar, Maulana AK Azad and their likes have chosen it to be – a cosmo, a nation with innumerable differences but one and a proud India. We need to abolish hatred from the roots – from school level. It is the political history of India which is seeding enmity. It is our political rhetoric which is problematic.

Let us diagnose the actual problems sooner than later and fix them there only. No religion or religious text preaches hatred, it is we the upholder of religions who make it our way to befit our interests.

Le 19 août 1985, dans un stade où plus de 80 000 jeunes Musulmans sont rassemblés à l’occasion des Jeux Panarabiques, le pape Jean-Paul II prononce un discours qui marquera les esprits. Invité par le roi Hassan II du Maroc, il commence par quelques mots en arabe : « Ma première salutation s’adresse à vous tous […]. Paix à vous tous ». S’ensuit un discours idéaliste et prônant avant tout le dialogue sur base des grands points communs entre Islam et Christianisme.

Vingt-deux ans plus tard, le 17 octobre 2007, 138 dignitaires religieux musulmans écrivent la lettre ouverte « A Common Word between us and you » (ACW) aux responsables des Églises chrétiennes où, insistant sur le caractère indispensable du dialogue entre les deux religions qui, ensemble, rassemblent la moitié de l’humanité, ils étudient de manière comparative et étayée par les textes sacrés des deux religions ce qui constitue de leur point de vue le socle commun du Christianisme et de l’Islam : l’Amour de Dieu et l’Amour du prochain.

Ces deux textes, tous deux jalons du dialogue interreligieux qui se développe depuis quelques dizaines d’années en Europe et ailleurs, méritent d’être approfondis. Ont-ils un lien ? Qui sont leurs auteurs, quels sont leurs destinataires respectifs ? Pourquoi ont-ils été rédigés ? Peut-on les comparer ? Dans quelle mesure ? Comment les lire de manière sociologique ? Que dire de leur impact, quelles sont leurs conséquences ? Sur cette base, que peut-on dire du dialogue interreligieux aujourd’hui et de ses perspectives pour l’avenir ?