Toward a Theory of Religious Pluralism

For more on this event, visit: bit.ly/VsjBYC
For more on the Berkley Center, visit: berkleycenter.georgetown.edu
February 5, 2013 | Renowned sociologist Peter Berger argues that secularization theory-the idea that modernity necessarily leads to a decline of religion-has been falsified. Rather than an age of secularity, ours is an age of pluralism. In other words, the problem of modernity is not that the gods have fled, but that there are too many of them around.
Berger discussed his ideas on religion and modernity and sketched an outline of a possible theory of pluralism for the modern era.

[@MW-eg4gu]

Gspotter is correct.

[@GSpotter63]

Reality, whatever it is, does not conform itself to what we think or believe. It is, what it is, whether we like it or not. This applies just as much to religious ideologies as it does to anything else. Truth (God or no God) is, what it is, regardless of what we individually choose to think it is. We can all have our own opinion as to what we think it is, but that does not make the truth (God or no God) to be what we believe it to be. Multiple mutually exclusive explanations of what we think truth is could in fact all be wrong, but they cannot all be true in the same way as the same time. The only ligament explanation of truth is the one that matches reality. This ideology that all roads lead to the truth despite the fact that all of the roads go in different directions is logically incoherent.

[@ellispetersmindfulness]

That's assuming that you understand truly what the words in the dogmatic teachings mean. If you God goes beyond form, but only manifests in form, then we could realize that words don't really count. So, the interpretation of Islam and Christianity could be wrong, while the devotion leads to the same God/Truth. Basically, the idea you have would be correct if our interpretations of the religions were correct. But, the human mind is limited, and to assume we understand scriptures perfectly is ignorant in my opinion.

[@GSpotter63]

@Tay Nov Jesus Christ clearly said he was the only way to the father... " I am the way the truth and the life, nobody gets to the father but through me" If this is not true then Christ is a liar... If it is true than all the others are liars.. Perhaps what Jesus was saying is that nobody gets to to father accept through the truth... And he was the one telling the truth.

[@GSpotter63]

@Tay Nov There is only *ONE* truth... Truth is like a mountain. People see it from many sides and at different distances. Depending on their individual view point the mountain may look very different to each person. They can even travel all around it and get closer to it. As they do, they learn more about the mountain. By this learning, their understanding of the mountain changes, sometimes in very drastic ways. Hopefully that understanding becomes more accurate to the facts of the real mountain (truth). In fact, some will definitely understand the mountain much better than others. *But it is paramount that we not forget that it is the people and their individual understanding of the mountain that is changing, not the mountain.* The mountain (truth) does not morph itself into whatever the 8 billion individual viewers thinks it is. It is, what it is. End of argument. One is, and should be free to look for that truth for themselves. Even show others their current view of the mountain (truth). But one must never forget that nobody understand it all, (Except for perhaps the maker of that mountain) and so has no right to force their view of the mountain (truth) onto others. Relativism is just stupid.

[@GSpotter63]

@Tay Nov This religion of Social Justice-isam is based on moral relativism. Which itself has no bases for its grounding. It is all just individual opinions forced by the will of the collective. The values that a society ultimately adopts is the one enforce by the biggest and strongest among them. Even if that is total anarchy. If the values system that a society ultimately adopts is in fact the one enforce by the biggest and strongest among them, then there will no longer be freedom for the individual to make their own value system. Moral relativism in any society is a self defeating illusion. It just does not work. How this simple fact is missed by so many I find perplexing. Mankind cannot live without objective morals..... His own individual opposing selfish man made value systems (Moral relativism) ultimately destroy everything. Including himself. I hate to say this........ But the only consistent and reliable set of confirmable objective morals I have found in my 50+ years of life definitely does not come from the unreliable folly of man. Anyone that thanks it can, is living in a fantasy world of their own making.

[@GSpotter63]

​@Tay Nov *"Bear in mind, "The Bible is true because the Bible says so" is problematic and tautological."* Of course not, that would be circular reasoning or begging the question. I have not stated what the absolute truth is just pointing gout that there is one... If there is *NO* God, no amount of belief will make him just pop into existence. Likewise, if there *IS* a God no amount of disbelief will make him just disappear either. Reality, whatever it is, does not conform itself to what we think or believe. It is, what it is, whether we like it or not. This Idea that the universe and reality can somehow conform itself to match what 8 billion individuals think it is all at the same time is simply preposterous... If the information found in the bible is true, then it is true. The fact that it claims to be true has no bearing on whether or not it is true. In fact if it was true then it claiming itself to be true would also be true (correct). Discounting the bible simply because it claims to be true would be a fallacious argument.