Church on the Rock Theological Seminary

Paper Presentation

Course : Asian Christian Theology

Topic : Religious Pluralism

Facilitator : Dr. K Vijayan

Presenter : Kunuvelu D Vadeo

Date : 26- 11-21.

Introduction

Asia is vast geographical area covering many diverse nation and people. It includes variety of
religious tradition and languages. We live today in a world that is religiously and morally
pluralistic. Religious diversity of this sort can fruitfully be explored in many ways for
instance, from psychological, anthropological, or historical perspectives. The current
discussion, however, will concern itself primarily with some issues surrounding religious
diversity. This paper will briefly deal with religious pluralism and some of the theological
issues with a conclusion note.

1. Religious Pluralism

Religion pluralism is “the view that different or even contradictory, forms of religious belief
and behaviour could or even should coexist. The problem with religious pluralism arises
when one particular tradition dominates society, denying the legitimacy of other streams and
marginalizing them as sectarian phenomena.” 1 Stanley J. Samartha write, “Pluralism does not
relativize Truth. It relativizes different responses to Truth which are conditioned by history
2
and culture. It rejects the claim of any particular response to be absolute.” The
acknowledgment that no one can hold the truth in the palm of his or her hand is the basic
orientation of sound religious pluralism. Truth is not identical with our truth claims. In a
pluralistic world, those who embrace a particular position must be enlightened about
1
Kosuke Koyama, “A Theological Reflection on Religious Pluralism,” This paper, reprinted from an
Occasional Paper of the National Campus Ministry Association, Pentecost 2000, is a revised version of a
presentation Kosuke Koyama first gave to the Bishops’ Theological Conference of the Lutheran Church in
Minnesota, USA and appeared in The Ecumenical Review, World Council of Churches, April 1999.
2
Kosuke Koyama, “A Theological Reflection on Religious Pluralism.”

1
positions other than their own. It takes critical intellectual effort to understand and appreciate
the plural reality of truths and their meaningful coexistence.

Asia is a vast geographical area covering many diverse nations and peoples. It is also an area
that houses a variety of religious traditions and languages. These religions include Hinduism,
Jainism, Christianity, Sikhism, several forms of Buddhism, Confucian traditions and Islam. A
nation like India has its own rich diversity in terms of cultures, languages and religions.
Though each of the nations within Asia may have a different dominant religion, all nations
within Asia are multi-religious in their makeup.

2. Theological Issues
2.1. Christ Among Other Savior

One of the contentious issues in the Asian Christian response to religious pluralism in Asia is
the Christo centricity of the Christian faith. While one can quickly discover points of contacts
and instances of similarity in the concept of God or the view of scripture, the belief in the
uniqueness of Jesus Christ is a matter of intense debate in Asia. This debate involves at least
three major issues. One is the attempt by Christian theologians in Asia to discover a language
that is relevant and meaningful to Asians in their specific contexts. The other issue is the
apologetic side of Christology where one is faced with questions such as ‘Why Christ, why
not Buddha, why not Krishna?’ and ‘What about the uniqueness and finality of Christ?’ The
third concern is the way in which non-Christian Asians have articulated the significance of
Christ in relation to their own religio-cultural contexts.

Asian theologians provide us with a wide variety of Christologies mainly because of the
diversity of religious and cultural contexts in which they find themselves. One of the
challenges for Asian theologians is to find a way to capture, in the Asian religious setting, the
view of Christ as Logos-made flesh. While the concept of Logos as such is foreign to Asian
religio-philosophical traditions, the concept of incarnation is not, in any way, foreign to the
Asian religious and philosophical traditions, especially the traditions of India. Revised
Christology is the theology of Samattha (Theo-centric Christology). In his revised
Christology Samartha portrays Jesus as a Liberator of humanity. Samartha insists that the
revised Christology is a Christology from below over the Christology from above. He rejects
two natures of Jesus and he only emphasis on humanity of Jesus. He even cites Pauline
writings as 2Cor.5:19; 1Cor.6:14; etc, to show the inferior status of Jesus before God and

2
Father.3 He suggests that the incarnation of Jesus Christ must be understood in term of
‘divinity’ rather than ‘deity’.4

2.2. Religious Dialogue

“The word Dialogos, derived from the root “Diologein” stands for a literary and
philosophical method, by which truth is sought and expressed. Dialogue is an interpersonal
communication, a give and take, an exchange between two or more persons.”5 Religious
dialogue, also referred to as interfaith dialogue, is a conversation between two or more people
with different religious faith or culture in order to share their views freely and to listen to the
others respectfully. This dialogue is not just words or talk. It includes human interaction and
relationships. Interreligious dialogue can take place between communities and individuals.
The main purpose of such dialogue is for each person to learn from others and to understand
why they hold a particular religious opinion. Interreligious dialogue occurs on four levels:
knowledge, action, spirituality, and morality. Dialogues aim to achieve several goals. It
increases mutual understanding, and good relations and it also helps to identify causes of
tension between Christianity and other religions. These are often social, economic and
political rather than religious. It gives confidence to prevent tensions.6.

Stanley J. Samartha Dialogue is a living relationship with people of other faiths, it is

searching for community along with our neighbours in love and with love. Samartha believes
that spirit is working even in other religious traditions. Dialogue that presupposes “mutual
understanding and mutual trust” is the basis for pluralism. Theologies of dialogue and of
pluralism, then, share the same foundation. Both are creatively open to bearing witness to
Christ. 7

In dialogue we may share common personal experiences. We may then be led to find points
of similarity among different religious traditions. Theological meditation on such points of
similarity has often been discouraged; and in inter-religious situations it is the dissimilarities
which tend to be emphasized. Beware, it is said, being interested in the similarities will lead

3
S.J. Samartha, One Christ- Many Religion. Towards a Revised Christology (Bangalore: SATHIRI,
1992), 121-122.
4
S.J. Samartha, One Christ…,133.
5
Amaldass Anand, Christian contribution to Indian Philosophy (Madras: CLS,1995),129.
6
M. Fethullah Gullen, “The Necessity of Interfaith Dialogue,” The foundation magazine 31(2000):1-
12.
7
S. J. Samartha, Courage for Dialogue: Ecumenical issues in Interreligious Dialogue (Geneva:
WCC,1981), x-xi.

3
you into syncretism. Christians fear that Christianity’s uniqueness will be eroded if there are
points of similarity with other religious traditions. This perception is strange because it is a
cardinal Christian teaching, given in the Jewish Torah, that God created all humans in the
image of God. There is a common human experience, and that common experience is not to
be feared.8

2.3. Inter faith conversion

The early Protestant missionaries to Asia were governed by an evangelical theology that
made the conversion of people of other religions the primary agenda for their Christian
discipleship. The ground-breaking publication of William Carey’s “An Enquiry into the
Obligations of Christians to Use Means for the Conversion of the Heathens.” 9 clearly reflects
a similar understanding of the other. Such a theology is prevalent among Christians in Asia
even today. Therefore, many in Asia tend to view the people of other religions as potential
converts and not just the followers of a different religious tradition. The contemporary scene
is saturated with mission agencies started by individuals and groups of Christians in Asia and
most of them reveal a similar posture towards the other.10

2.4. Religious Pluralism and Tolerance

For Panikkar religion is the path that leads one to salvation or to the state of fulfilment.
Salvation is understood as anything making one whole, free and complete, which could also
be understood by different people as nirvana, heaven, nothingness, etc. therefore religion is a
set of tradition or Doctrines which is believed to lead one to the fulfilment of one’s life. For
Panikkar religions are like the different colours of a rainbow, where no colour is superior or
has monopoly over the others.11 One of the contentious issues in the Asian Christian response
to religious pluralism in Asia is the Christo centricity of the Christian faith. While one can
quickly discover points of contacts and instances of similarity in the concept of God or the
view of scripture, the belief in the uniqueness of Jesus Christ is a matter of intense debate in
Asia. This debate involves at least three major issues. One is the attempt by Christian
theologians in Asia to discover a language that is relevant and meaningful to Asians in their

8
Kosuke Koyama, “A Theological Reflection on Religious Pluralism.”
9
M. Thomas Thangaraj, “Religious pluralism, Dialogue and Asian Christian Responses,” in Christian
Theology in Asia, edited by Sebastian C.H. Kim (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 158.
10
M. Thomas Thangaraj, “Religious pluralism, Dialogue and Asian Christian Responses,” 160.
11
B.R Ambedkar and Raimundo Panikkar,
https://www.egyankosh.ac.in/bitstream/123456789/34694/1/Unit-4.pdf (24.11.21).

4
specific contexts. The other issue is the apologetic side of Christology where one is faced
with questions such as ‘Why Christ, why not Buddha, why not Krishna?’ and ‘What about
the uniqueness and finality of Christ?’ The third concern is the way in which non-Christian
Asians have articulated the significance of Christ in relation to their own religio-cultural
contexts.12

The evangelical debates over pluralism in India are characterized by strong anti-Western and
anti-colonial themes and also by some modifications of traditional evangelical perceptions in
theology and missions. Their position is well expressed by an Indian missiologist: “religious
tolerance in India is possible as long as one does not claim uniqueness for his religion, as
long as he is willing to say that his religion is one among the many, not above the others and
probably only part of the one and only universal and eternal religion ‘the Sanatana
Dharma.’”13

2.5. Exclusive and Inclusive

Often pluralism is discussed in terms of inclusivism and exclusivism. Exclusion and inclusion
are central to religious discourse. “For many are called, but few are chosen” (Matt. 22:14). It
is also basic to human experience. “Am I included or excluded?” is an ever-present
existential question for all of us. Usually inclusion is more positively valued than exclusion.
We like to be included in, not excluded from, salvation, be it eternal or temporal. Often
inclusion and exclusion are understood in terms of the law of contradiction. To say that I am
a Buddhist suggests the impossibility of my being a Muslim. If Christianity is the true
religion then Islam cannot be a true religion (exclusion). In this context, pluralism appears as
a third position, presumably over-coming the limitations of inclusion and exclusion. Truth
includes. Truth excludes. Truth is plural.14 To Stanley plurality belongs to the structure of
reality, in theological terms plurality may even be the will of God for all life.15

Samartha rejects exclusivism and inclusivism and he named these as ‘patronizing cousins.’
He felts that this two stand point brings violence against other faiths. 16 Samartha insisted that

12
“Religious Diversity (Pluralism),” First published Tue May 25, 2004; substantive revision (Mon Nov
2, 2020), https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/religious-pluralism (25.11.2021)
13
John M. Prasad, “The Concept of Religious Pluralism in Indian Culture and Potential Modifications to
the Existing Missionary Approach,” CMS Bulletin, Summer 1995 (Centre for Mission Studies, Union Biblical
Seminary, Pune, India), 11.
14
Kosuke Koyama, “A Theological Reflection on Religious Pluralism.”
15
S.J. Samartha, The pilgrim Christ (Bangalore: Asian Trading Corporation, 1994), 6.
16
S.J.Samartha ,One Christ…,112-114.

5
dialogue is part of the living relationship between ideologies and people of different faiths, as
they share life of the community. 17 Samartha insists that the relationship between Christian
and others should not be based on religious difference. He says that the Gospel is addressed
to human beings and not to the religions. 18 Wesley Ariarajah, a Sri Lankan theologian who
succeeded Samartha as the Director of the sub-unit on Dialogue within the World Council of
Churches, argues and promotes this view of the other in many of his writings.19

Ken Gnanakan, a well-known Indian evangelical theologian and General Secretary of the
Asia Theological Association, wrote a book in which he evaluated Hick's pluralism by
arguing that its main weakness was the unbiblical interpretation of Christ's person. Gnanakan
identify the Christian concept of salvation with that of other religions, and suggests an
exclusivist-inclusivist model instead of the typical exclusivist paradigm. 20 Gnanakan does not
agree with the traditional exclusivism model and instead suggests an exclusivist-inclusivist
model which he believes is the biblical position. He asserts that “God does not demand pure
exclusivism”, rather,” we are confronted with the inclusivistic purpose of God in his salvific
intentions for the world.21

Exclusivism maintains that the central claims of Christianity are true and that where the
claims of Christianity conflict to those of other religions, the latter are to be rejected as false.
The word ‘exclusive’ is not used in a personal, attitudinal or social sense, i.e. pride,
superiority and a desire to exclude others. That is, it is not talking about exclusive people but
exclusive truth.22 Like exclusivism, it maintains that the central claims of the Christian faith
are true, but it adopts a much more positive view of other religions than does exclusivism.
Although exclusivists hold that God has revealed himself definitively in Jesus Christ and that
Jesus is somehow central to Gods provision of salvation for humankind, they are willing to
allow that god’s salvation is available through non-Christian religions.23

2.6. Pluralism and Syncretism

17
S.J. Samartha, Courage for Dialogue: Ecumenical issues in Interreligious Dialogue (Geneva:
WCC,1981),1
18
S.J. Samartha, Between two culture: Ecumenical Ministry in a Pluralist World (Geneva: WCC
Publication, 1996),40.
19
M. Thomas Thangaraj, “Religious pluralism, Dialogue and Asian Christian Responses,” 163.
20
Ho Jin Jun, “Evangelical challenge to Religious Pluralism in Asian Context.”
21
Ho Jin Jun, “Evangelical challenge to Religious Pluralism in Asian Context.”
22
Christopher J H Wright, The uniqueness of Jesus (USA: Monarck Books. 2001) 37-38.
23
Christopher J H Wright, The uniqueness of Jesus, 37.

6
Condemning syncretism is like condemning the air one breathes. Nothing in history is pure
and isolated. For the human mind, there is no choice but to meet, converse and syncretize.
What a vast reality of syncretism is Christianity in Japanese Buddhism and Indonesian Islam
are syncretic. Religion and culture that do not engage in syncretic process are fossilized.
Syncretism is a perennial life movement sponsored by both nature and culture.24

Hendrik Kraemer called syncretism the “illegitimate mingling of different religious

elements.” The prophetic religion of biblical realism,” he wrote, must not be mingled with
naturalistic and monistic religions. Nearly fifty years later, M. M. Thomas wrote, “Even
various apprehensions of the totality of the world and life, i.e., religious and secular faith,
need not be denied validity so long as they can he redefined or transformed in the light of the
centrality of Christ.”25 The centrality of Christ is not compromised. The one who is so
completely excluded to the point of ‘even death on a cross’ (Phil. 2:8) is now the centre. Such
‘syncretism’ is Christ-centred. This Christ centred approach to syncretism is illuminating for
the Christian. It will, however, be perceived as imperialistic by people of other faiths.

If there is power to “bring together,” there is power to “break away.” The history of religions,
including that of Christianity, demonstrates these two contrasting movements. We live in the
confluence of these two forces. One should not blame only syncretism and let separation go
free. Separatism has not achieved the intended purity. Movements towards purity are
frequently fraught with subtle arrogance. “I know what is pure!” The existence of a “Pure
Gospel Church” will be the occasion for someone else to open a “Pure-Pure Gospel Church.”
People in the Pacific Islands are pleasantly confused (amused) when they compare the early
missionaries’ dedication to eliminate “pagan culture” (diastasis) with their reversal today in
trying to bring it back (synstasis). with M. M. Thomas that a Christ-centred syncretism is
theologically more meaningful than Christ-centred separatism. “In him all things hold
together” has an eschatological dimension. It does not mean “anything goes.”26

Conclusion

Among Christians today, pluralism has become a subject of serious concern, particularly in
relation to human sexuality and the truth claims of other religions. Many fears that pluralism
will erode God given moral truth Asia is indeed an extremely religious continent. In today’s

24
M. Thomas Thangaraj, “Religious pluralism, Dialogue and Asian Christian Responses,” 257.
25
M. Thomas Thangaraj, “Religious pluralism, Dialogue and Asian Christian Responses,” 261.
26
M. Thomas Thangaraj, “Religious pluralism, Dialogue and Asian Christian Responses,” 261-261.

7
contact we can see tones of religious pluralism theological issues are pumping up and it’s
getting worse. There must be a mutual understanding and respect of one religion among the
religion yet the Christian have to understand that the Gospel should not be syncretise. The
reality of religious diversity reduces their justified confidence in their beliefs feel threatened
and thus, in an attempt to stand up for the truths they still firmly believe, become even more
intolerant of those with other perspectives. Today Christian should ignore the mindset of
excluvism because it will lead into grater issues. When we look into present context, we can
see that religious dialogue or interfaith dialogue is one of the biggest platforms for the
religions coming together and sharing their faith to one another. In this platform it builds
mutual understanding yet most of the issues have been arise from this kind of dialogue as
well and Christian should be very careful in stage. While proclaiming Good new one must
not force anyone into conversion because it lead to disrespect of one another, conversion
must come from one own heart.

Living in a religious pluralistic country it is a great opportunity for Christian in doing mission
because mission itself is at their doorstep. Jesus’ mission covers all types of religion with
mutual understanding. It is true that Christians have a message to all people and nations but
we must admit that the people of other faiths also have a message to tell us. The Church
should seek ways in which Christian societies can engage in dialogue with the people of
various faiths and ideologies.

Bibliography

Anand, Amaldass. Christian contribution to Indian Philosophy. Madras: CLS,1995.

Gullen, M. Fethullah. “The Necessity of Interfaith Dialogue,” The foundation magazine

31(2000).

Jun, Ho Jin. “Evangelical challenge to Religious Pluralism in Asian Context.”

Prasad, John M. "The Concept of Religious Pluralism in Indian Culture and Potential
Modifications to the Existing Missionary Approach," CMS Bulletin, Summer 1995.

Samartha, S.J. Between two culture: Ecumenical Ministry in a Pluralist World. Geneva:
WCC Publication, 1996.

8
Samartha, S.J. Courage for Dialogue: Ecumenical issues in Interreligious Dialogue. Geneva:
WCC,1981.

Samartha, S.J. One Christ- Many Religion. Towards a Revised Christology. Bangalore:
SATHIRI, 1992.

Samartha, S.J. The pilgrim Christ. Bangalore: Asian Trading Corporation, 1994.

Thangaraj, M. Thomas. “Religious pluralism, Dialogue and Asian Christian Responses.” In

Christian Theology in Asia. Edited by Sebastian C.H. Kim. New York: Cambridge
University Press, 2008.

Wright, Christopher J H. The uniqueness of Jesus. USA: Monarck Books, 2001.

Koyama, Kosuke. “A Theological Reflection on Religious Pluralism.”

Ambedkar, B.R and Raimundo Panikkar,

https://www.egyankosh.ac.in/bitstream/123456789/34694/1/Unit-4.pdf (24.11.21).

“Religious Diversity (Pluralism).” First published Tue May 25, 2004; substantive revision
(Mon Nov 2, 2020). https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/religious-pluralism
(25.11.2021).