He puts two categories that proof would fall under: the first category deals with «things that would absolutely convince me of
the truth of a particular religion ``.
To prove that he is open - minded, he is willing to convert if he could be convinced of
the truth of any particular religion.
The truth of no particular religion could be taught - only the fact that religions claim truth.
Not exact matches
Dabblers are compelled by their very dabbling to disdain those who will not dabble and who persist in believing the
truth claims
of one
particular religion.
The interesting thing is that you do nt have to study any religous book (and by religous book I take that to mean the authoritative book
of a
particular religion, like the bible, koran, etc.) to get to the
truth.
Of course, the best thinking Christians, Muslims or Jews would say the same thing, that the
truth led them to their
particular religion which in turn enriches the
truth.
[Rachel Zoll, 2001:8 A] This example indicates the influence that the sheer number
of adherents
of a
particular religion have on the socio - political affairs
of modern states, and in a world where
truth seems to get blurred amidst statistics.
We see in his example how He lived aboved the Synagogue and spread the Goodnews
of God, not bound by the Synagogue but the
TRUTH — doing good all over the world and making Himself example, but today people preach what they don't do and brain wash people to be and remain in a
particular organisation called
religion.
The
particular value
of this approach for a Christian theology
of religions is that it recognizes
truth in the convictions
of these other traditions in the terms concretely stated arid believed by those within those traditions, and it recognizes their status as true alternatives to Christian faith.
Let us not forget that there is some
truth in Marx's critique
of religion, and
of Christianity in
particular.
Other
religions offer other
truths, the Hindus believe that everyone finds their own path to the
truth, regardless
of the
particular god they follow.
The two statements can co-exist quite happily - that some people disagree on what religious
truth might look like, doesn't therefore mean that there can never be such a thing as religious
truth, and that a
particular religion can't be the the most faithful expression
of it.