Religious Pluralism Exam (copy)

What is Religious Pluralism “RP”?

All religions are true and equally true.

The definitive features of John Hick’s version of Religious Pluralism (RP)

1) Absolute truth-claims (my religion is true and all others are false) cannot be considered alongside pluralism. 2) Knowledge of The Real is beyond the scope of complete human understanding. 3) All revelatory religions are derived from the same religious reality and ultimately seek an authentic path to God or The Real. 4) Mutual witnessing is beneficial, but evangelizing/proselytizing is not.

What is Hick’s theoretical argument that RP is the best religious view?

Each religion is true within its own phenomenal reality (or personal understanding of what is true).

Explain his history of religion through the lens of Religious Pluralism?

Religion was created on the basis of divine revelation, or the same religious reality being interpreted by different religious prophets that somehow received the message of God.

What view(s) are Pluralism supposed to be better than (and better in what way)?

RP is supposed to be better than the views that: 1) My religion is true and all others are false, and 2) No religions are true. Religious Pluralism is better because it is tolerant of all revelatory religions.

What does Hick mean by “The Real”?

“The Real” refers to the divine reality experienced by people who experience religion; it is hard to comprehend and almost impossible to communicate through human language.

What is the obvious problem with RP?

All religions cannot be true and equally true because they contradict one another (they have different diagnoses and cures).

What does Hick say in God and the Universe of Faiths to try to get around this problem?

Hick tries to get around this problem by saying that religions are not to be taken literally. Rather, religions are able to interpret their religions and have different experiences because there isn’t one religion that is “true”—religious claims are simply true within the “story” that is their religion.

What strategies do Pluralists use in general to explain away differences in religions, according to Yandell?

Yandell asserts that Pluralists claim that The Real has been interpreted differently by different peoples over time based on geographical location, linguistic understanding by prophets, etc.

Yandell’s criticism of Religious Pluralism, first set of cause-and-effect claims

Keep all religions true and equally true, but this is an issue because —> The Real is beyond our capacity to describe (human concepts do not apply to The Real) —> Claims about The Real are not to be taken literally, or else one would religion would prove to be more true than another.

Yandell’s criticism of Religious Pluralism, second set of cause-and-effect claims

RP must convince us that it is the best explanation for the history of religion —> That requires making claims about The Real such as 1) The Real is the cause of religious experience, 2) The Real is beyond humans’ capacity of understanding, 3) The Real is morally good —> For RP to be an explanation at all, its claims must be taken literally (the claims cannot merely exist within the realm of fiction).

The Obvious Problem for RP, in simple terms

1) RP says that all religions are true and equally true.

2) What one religion says can contradict what other religions say.

So, 3) RP entails contradictions.

4) Since contradictions cannot be true, anything that entails a contradiction cannot be true.

So, 5) RP cannot be true.

2 is false because different religions are different “stories” depicting the same information (so they are allowed to contradict one another).

Why do proponents of RP think it is a good view?

RP is a good explanation for why revelatory religions have a similar interpretation of the same divine reality.

What are Yandell’s views on whether all religions are the same?

All religions cannot be the same because they have a different set of diagnoses and cures that contradict each other. Religions cannot be taken literally because they would effectively prove each other to be false.

What are Yandell’s various criticisms that RP must sacrifice its own tolerance in order to keep all religions equally true?

Only revelatory religions are included in Hick’s view, which does not include, as an example, atheist or pagan beliefs.