Story

Haben Sie noch kein Konto? Melden Sie sich jetzt an. Es ist kostenlos!

The Lausanne Global Conversation is on the World Wide Open Network

Kapstadt 2010 Vorab-Dokument

Die Wahrheit zählt! Trete ein für die Wahrheit!

Autor: Carver T. Yu
Datum: 19.06.2010
Category: Wahrheit & Pluralismus

Bewertung (9)
  • Currently 4.00/5
Bevorzugte (5) Empfehlen

Übersetzungen

Zur Verfügung stehende Übersetzungen:

Ursprünglich geschrieben in Englisch

Anmerkung der Redaktion: Dieser Vorabbericht zu Kapstadt 2010 wurde von Carver T. Yu geschrieben und stellt eine Übersicht dar zum Thema: „Sich für die Wahrheit Christi in einer pluralistischen, globalisierten Welt einsetzen“, welches bei der Multiplex-Session diskutiert wird. Stellungnahmen zu diesem Bericht durch die Lausanner globalen Gespräche werden an die Autoren und andere Personen weitergeleitet und sollen dabei helfen, die endgültige Präsentation beim Kongress festzulegen. 

Wir in Asien leben seit Jahrhunderten mit einer kulturellen Pluralität im Allgemeinen und einer religiösen Pluralität im Besonderen. Wir lebten mit der Pluralität, aber nicht mit dem Pluralismus. Pluralismus war nie eine Option. Wer Konfuzianist oder Taoist, Buddhist, Muslim oder Hindu ist, ist der festen Überzeugung, dass das, was er glaubt und lebt, die Wahrheit ist, die zu einer glaubwürdigen Menschheit oder zur ewigen Errettung führt. Alle anderen Wege führen bestenfalls zu einem unerfüllten Leben und schlimmstenfalls zu Perversion und Leiden. Die Wahrheit zählt, denn sie hat Auswirkungen auf unser Leben. Obwohl wir die anderen respektieren, sehen wir es trotzdem als unsere Verantwortung an, sie auf den richtigen Weg hinzuweisen. 

Der heutige Pluralismus ist völlig anders. Er ist eine Ideologie, die verkündet, die Wahrheit sei eine kulturelle Konstruktion und nur für die Kultur gültig, die sie festgelegt hat. Er hat somit keinen Einfluss auf eine andere Kultur oder irgendein System von Bedeutung. Es gibt keine Wahrheit, die eine Wahrheit für alle ist. Alle Wahrheiten sind relativ. Pluralismus gibt das Argument weiter von den Kulturen zu den Einzelnen. Beim Einzelnen wird nun vorausgesetzt, er sei der Grundstock der Realität, die Basis, auf der Bedeutung und Werte geschaffen werden. Der postmoderne Pluralist glaubt, dass jeder Einzelne seine eigene Logik erschaffen und seine eigenen Regeln aufstellen kann, indem er seine eigene Welt der Realität und Werte konstruiert. Der Einzelne ist „autonom“ in der Hinsicht, dass er sein eigenes Gesetz ist. Und nachdem jeder seine eigene Welt kreiert, kann es also so viele Welten geben wie es Einzelne gibt und jede ist lediglich ein Netz von Überzeugungen, die nur wahr sind für den Einzelnen, der sie zusammenwebt. Weil diese individuell erschaffenen Welten für sich einzigartig sind, sind sie somit unvergleichbar miteinander. Daher hat Pluralismus, trotz aller Rhetorik über den Dialog, alle Dialoge als unnötig und sinnlos dargestellt. 

Wenn nun die Wahrheit erschaffen ist, kann sie auch nach Belieben neu erschaffen werden. Sie ist somit abwartend und fließend und hat keine anhaltende Auswirkung auf irgend etwas. Indem der Pluralismus alle Wahrheiten radikal als relativ und abwartend verwirft, bringt er damit erfolgreich jede Verkündigung einer transzendenten Wahrheit für alle Menschen und Kulturen zum Schweigen. Obwohl er den Dogmatismus verurteilt, ist Pluralismus die dogmatischste aller Ideologien, weil er ohne zu zögern jedes anti-pluralistische Konzept der Wahrheit als dogmatisch und ausschließlich einordnet und es unumwunden ablehnt. Pluralismus als solcher ist die ansteckendste Form des Monismus – er ist der Monismus der Gleichgültigkeit. 

Jedoch braucht es nicht allzu viel kritische Analyse, um festzustellen, dass der Pluralist sich selbst widerspricht. Indem er den Pluralismus ausruft, nimmt der Pluralist stillschweigend an, dass er auf einem Aussichtspunkt hoch über allen anderen Kulturen und Individien steht und so ihre Relativität erkennt. Und doch ist der Aussichtspunkt, auf dem er steht, auf wundersame Weise trotzdem absolut. Wie macht er das möglich? Nur durch animalischen Glauben und dogmatischen Anspruch. 

Deutsch Translation by: LGC_Translation
Erklärung zu mehrsprachigen Funktionen | Schlage vor, Übersetzung zu bearbeiten

Stichwörter: Truth, Asien, Pluralismus, Vielfalt, Kultur, Individualismus, Postmoderne

Gespräch Kommentar übermitteln

 << Previous  1 2  3 4 5  Next >> 
Translate:
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten Suhail (0)
Jordanien

I totally agree that we should proclaim the "Truth" to a world full of relativity. Maybe some helpful questions here: what is relative to people today: behavior or values? Is it individual (subjectivsim) or cultural? Which culture is dependable: mine or others’? Are we talking about what is "Prohibeted", what is "Tolerated" and what is "ideal? Exploring the aforementioned questions could lead us into persuasive thoughts on relativism and the "how to" of presenting the Biblical Absolute Trut to the world.


10.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten Suhail (0)
Jordanien

I totally agree that we should proclaim the "Truth" to a world full of relativity. Maybe some helpful questions here: what is relative to people today: behavior or values? Is it individual (subjectivsim) or cultural? Which culture is dependable: mine or others’? Are we talking about what is "Prohibeted", what is "Tolerated" and what is "ideal? Exploring the aforementioned questions could lead us into persuasive thoughts on relativism and the "how to" of presenting the Biblical Absolute Trut to the world.


10.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten ChrisKidd (0)   
Grossbritannien

I found the distinction between plurality and pluralism which was really helpful.

Carver then points out the obvious, that pluralism constantly contradicts itself, talking of no truth, but trying to be an absolute truth; talking of respect but failing to listen to what others say.  As has been said elsewhere, it’s important to remember that some of the ’new atheists’ like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens are not themselves pluralists.  They are clear that they are making truth claims about the way the world is, and denying the truth claims of the religious, including Christians.  They close down debate through their dogmatic beliefs, but they are different to the old school pluralistic views.

So much of today’s world is pluralistic - you’re entitled to your own belief unless it affects my belief system, at which point, it can’t be true.  We need to deal with this ’unintellectual’ pluralism which so many of the young people I work with are growing up using as their belief system by encouraging the Church as a whole to engage in relevant ways with this issue.  If this isn’t dealt with then  well-meaning evangelism is at best irrelevant and at worst damaging.


09.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten Eliana_Valzura_de_Gi (1)  
Argentinien

En este mundo plural y pluralista, habría que hacer una discriminación que no veo en el artículo entre la Verdad, el logos, aquella de la cual se nos prometió que nos haría libres, y la "verdad moral". Me parece que en el artículo están demasiado identificadas, y en mi opinión son bien diferentes. Hablar de moralidad no es lo mismo, de ninguna manera, que hablar de la Verdad (Cristo), quien nos hizo santos y libres con su muerte en la cruz. La "moralidad", según como se entienda, puede resultar en una cárcel de dogmas y preceptos de los cuales Cristo vino a liberarnos. La "moralidad" no es la regla de oro de la vida cristiana, sino Cristo. Cuidado. Al fin y al cabo, la "moralidad" efectivamente puede estar teñida de ropaje cultural. Cristo no.

Segundo punto: Creo en la Verdad, con mayúsculas, que es única, unívoca y singular. Pero también creo que no debemos olvidar que cualquier pretensión de aprehender esa verdad absolutamente de parte de seres humanos débiles y falibles es una empresa fracasada, y acaso una arrogancia. Nuestro acercamiento a la Verdad siempre va a ser zigzagueante, sólo un asedio de la verdad, un andar y retroceder, escribir y borrar, aprender ydesaprender. Día a día, en permanente y continua revelación. Pretender tener La Verdad lista, cerrada, completa y empaquetada, para defenderla puede que nos lleve el día de mañana a replantearnos si quizás algunas de esas verdades eran sólo ideas nuestras, y no La Verdad absoluta.


09.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten Mojoe (7)
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ Eliana_Valzura_de_Gi:

Eliana,


Maybe you could clarify what you feel morality to be?  Are you suggesting that morality is simply a human measurement and subject to cultural bias?


Thanks for the clarification.


09.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten Eliana_Valzura_de_Gi (1)  
Argentinien
@ Mojoe:

No. No estoy sugiriendo que "moralidad" es simplemente una cuestión cultural. Aunque sí estoy segura que algunas cosas que culturalmente no son consideradas dentro de los parámetros morales para una cultura (p.ej. estar las mujeres con el torso desnudo), para otras culturas son perfectamente aceptables. Lo que digo que la "moralidad" no es lo mismo que la "verdad". Cristo, la Verdad, es mucho más que moralidad. Si predicamos, predicamos a Cristo. No predicamos, o no deberíamos predicar, un catálogo de moralidad. La buena o mala moralidad no deberá ser nunca una moralidad heterónoma, sino autónoma, inscripta en el corazón por Cristo, como bien lo promete en su Nuevo Pacto.


Y digo también que la "moralidad", según quién sea que la predica y la impone, puede ser contraria a la libertad en Cristo. Justamente porque serán imposiciones heterónomas. Y todos sabemos, lamentablemente que se puede ejercer poder, violencia y opresión en nombre de Cristo.


La moralidad tiene que ver con el accionar libre y soberano del Espíritu Santo en las vidas. No con reglamentaciones impuestas.


Por eso creo que hay que hilar fino entre La Verdad (el Logos), única, unívoca y absoluta, y la verdad moral.


El objeto de nuestra evangelización es Cristo. No la verdad moral. De ella se encarga él operando desde dentro del corazón transformado por su poder.


09.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten Mojoe (7)
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ Eliana_Valzura_de_Gi:

For the vast majority of what you are saying, I agree with.  Christ is what we teach and He/Truth is freeing, but this seems a little esoteric.  How would you suggest communicating this idea to someone who is predisposed against Christianity?  In virtually all cases, atheists (for example) see Christianity as inherent to rules, regulations, and past travesties and I have seen a dramatic increase in the need to include more logic when ministering to them.  The very idea of having them understand ultimate truth and freedom, when they believe the polar opposite, seems a little more complex.


To rephrase the question, how would you suggest communicating to someone with these beliefs?


09.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten Eliana_Valzura_de_Gi (1)  
Argentinien
@ Mojoe:

No entiendo por qué resulta "esotérico" plantear que hay que predicar a Cristo, que es la Verdad, predicando la gracia, la aceptación y el perdón irrestricto YA obtenido por él en la cruz. No hay necesidad de agregar "moralidad" a nuestra predicación de Cristo. El es la única moralidad necesaria.


Cuando las personas conocen a Cristo, conocen la verdad, y la verdad los hace libres. Eso dice su palabra.


Ese "hacerlos libres" implicará en cada caso el accionar del Espíritu Santo en la transformación de las vidas. Pero eso es posterior. Estaríamos hablando, más bien de una tarea de discipulado y no de evangelización, en la que la persona advertirá la "llamada al seguimiento", y sabrá deslindar entre la "gracia cara" y la "gracia barata".


Me parece que a veces queremos nosotros mismos hacer lo que es obra exclusiva del Espíritu Santo.


La moralidad no salva. Salva Cristo, salva la gracia. Y la gente está sedienta de gracia, no de códigos morales.


Mezclar la Verdad con la verdad moral e identificarlas como si fueran lo mismo, me parece, es identificar la ley con la gracia.


09.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten Mojoe (7)
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ Eliana_Valzura_de_Gi:

Thank You.


09.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten Eliana_Valzura_de_Gi (1)  
Argentinien
@ Mojoe:

Gracias a ud. por compartir conmigo. Que Dios lo bendiga


09.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten kshalhoub (0)  
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika

An excellent article. More than ever we must stand for Biblical Truth. Agreeing with the author I would like to add the following statements:

“The problem with pluralism, atheism, secularism and naturalism is that because they live  in “the box” ( this world) which contains matter, energy , time , space and people. They do not believe there is anything outside of it. No wonder each person fabricates their own truth. They have actually made up their own God who is confined in “the box” with them. They do not realize that God is outside “the box”. He has created “the box” but has chosen to reveal Himself to man. I love Isaiah 57:15 that shows us the transcendence of God (independent from the universe and removed from the box) yet, His immanence (active, close and accessible to us). Kamel (USA and Lebanon)


30.06.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 1 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten Hope_Achiro (1)  
Uganda
@ kshalhoub:

First we ourselves must know and be convinced of the truth! Not every christian is passionate about the truth in christ. We have also pu God in a box and are too lazy to seek him or afraid of findind out his will because like the rich man, he may require us to give it all.


So when the world build up its "truths", we know they are wrong but are not too sure or grounded in ours that we can’t defend it. Even when we are bold enough to offer it, its challenged & we have no answers!


Do you know many many christains still dont have the answers to the common consistent questions the world has been asking for centuries? I dont know some too. Why is there suffering? Why would a loving God create hell? Why birth if there is definate death? Why do many church the leaders lie? Is speaking in tongues real? Is baptism a requirement for heaven etc etc.


We have even brought first plurality & then pluralim into the church. Look at the many denominations! Look at the infighting in history. Look at the "smiles" and "handshakes" in photos of church leaders from different denominations. I don’t think the Chatholics are convinced about Pentecostals at all but now we tolerate each other. And in exchange we may end up with no real convictions. Stand outside it all and watch Us, we sometimes are a confusing sight to the LOST WORLD.


We should study the truth, believe it & decide on it!


Decision is soooo important, the trouble is we have to decide again and again! Christians we should make up our minds on our faith, our purpose, our game & keep deciding to stay with our decisions. Christians should stop being apologetic and instead be Apologetics of the faith through a life of Love & Power!


A life of Power and Love can’t be debated.


09.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten Chris_C_Sing (3)  
Singapur

Thanks - I enjoyed this - but of course was also disturbed by pluralism.

Intuitively - one cannot argue against pluralism on the terms and assumptions of pluralism. One must assert absolute truth in contradition to the base assumption of pluralism. I suspect this is a trap we fall into in engagement, seeking common ground.

Thanks again for prompting thought.


09.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten Lorisa_Socorro_D (0)  
Philippinen

Thanks a lot, Carver for this insightful paper.

It seems to me one way for the global church to deal with pluralism, atheism and other false ideologies is to creatively collaborate in establishing quality Christian schools from early childhood on to univeristy in every major city in the world. These schools should be contextual, sensitive to the cultural and socio political issues of the city, transformational in theological perspectives and dialogical in its mode of teaching.

I wonder if we can create a social movement of quality Christian schools that will disciple the minds of children and youth to think biblically, contextually and transformatively?  


08.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten Vanessa_Mota (0)  
Brasilien

A pluralidade do mundo moderno, pode parcialmente ser explicada também como uma busca desesperada (já que a esperança se restringe a capacidade de alcançar a felicidade para além da divindade) e incessante da humanidade por  justificar sua incapacidade de uma vida reta diante de Deus. O sensus divinitatis que lembra ao homem a sua necessidade de Deus, contraditóriamente é o que o direciona ao mesmo tempo a negá-lo, tendo em vista que a angústia de uma vida imperfeita exige uma postura da morte do eu e o nascimento para Deus e sua vontade.


08.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten psivan (0)  
Indien

Carver’s article on `Truth’ is simply brilliant not only because of its clear and convincing argument, but perhaps more so because of the stark - almost prophetic - clarity and simplicity with which the disastrous implications of pluralism are laid out.

A minor point of concern for me would be the inclusion of Hinduism in his somewhat monolithic characterization of eastern religious plurality as traditionally always entailing commitment to some version of absolute truth. Hinduism is in my view the ultimate, original pluralism. It has always been that in its classical form and is the reason for its seductive attraction, and why the growing popularity of pluralism in its postmodern forms represents its ultimate triumph for the informed Hindu intellectual.

This, however, takes away little from Carver’s compelling presentation!


08.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten CTROC (0)
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ psivan:

Bravo! This is a wonderful article. It has substance and stimulates deeper levels of thought. Thanks Carver Yu.


My heart has been broken as I’ve seen well-meaning Christians succumb to pluralism and relativity. They hold to the absoluteness of Jesus and his love, but abandon absolutes when it comes to their ungodly lifestyes. They live in a divided reality. 


08.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten Romesh_B (0)  
Sri Lanka

A well written article and one that should be the clarion call and battle cry for the Church at large. Today Pluralism in a pluralistic society has laid siege to transcendent absolute truth. Truth has been attacked and lies and half truths have been promoted as truth.

The Word of God says, ‘You shall know the Truth and the Truth will set you free’. There is no wonder more people are in bondage and living in darkness.

But as much as we blame the atheist the pluralist for this calamity, I believe the Church of God needs to take as much blame or even more.

I believe it was Edmund Burke who said ‘All it takes for evil to prosper is for good men to do nothing.’ The Christians as a whole have not done much to combat this evil but even more the Church surrendered, politics, science, entertainment, education, etc to the secular world and concentrated on purely religious matters thus making itself seemingly redundant to secular society. Christianity was pushed into the religion box and we allowed it to happen. Today it seems we have only a small voice in secular society.

Jude says that we need to contend earnestly for the faith. It is time the Church arose and began to shine the truth, transcendent truth. The light of that truth will shine so bright that darkness will not be able to overcome. But as long as we try to fit in and compromise and accept what the world tells us so as notto rock the boat. The Darkness of Pluralism will prevail and truth will be squashed as being oppressive dogma.  


07.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten Moore1 (0)
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika

The subject matter of truth is an eye-opener. On reading this paper I do agree that "we have to preach the truth of the Christian gospel at all cost." Truth in the context of mankind is relative, and the fact that many nations can claim or identify with Pluralism replaces truth with facts. These facts are made into great persausive arguements. "Truth" as it should relate to the believer in having a healthy understanding of the God we serve, truth is understood as never being far away. Truth is one of the many attributes of Jesus Christ. This truth is not an arguement which seeks to persuade. It is not a set of words constructed into thoughts to give light to issues. This truth is set apart, unexplainable in subject, unreachable in thought and yet in the person of Christ attributive words like love, peace, Joy, mercy, goodness, and truth are all discriptives of God who has allowed us this limited view of  Him.


07.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten David_Lee (0)  
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika

I thought this was a well-written and concise treament of the subject. I agree that the Bible is the primary source of truth, but approaching the subject as you have, i believe the result is a paper that can interact directly with an unbelieving reader.

Perhaps one of the reasons our philosophical arguments in support of absolute truth ring hollow to some (many?) is that our lives are often conducted as though our absolute truths are in fact relative. I life lived consistently with our stated beliefs is one of the best apologetics.


06.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten Deborah_M (0)  
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika

Reading this paper and the other comments on here, brought me back to different instances of where I have seen and experienced injustice around the world, even in my own city, because of the lack of “moral truth”. It has got me thinking a lot. This whole topic is definitely relevant and I continue to ask God to give me ways to speak His TRUTH out. What He’s also shown me, is the importance of not just speaking it out, but making myself available and putting myself in certain surroundings, for others to actually see me LIVE out His TRUTH and the moral values that have been instilled in me. 


06.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten Lee_MJ (1)
Vereinigte Arabische Emirate

I truly enjoyed your paper. It was insightful and thorough, yet concise. I live in country where most still believe in there is an absolute truth. My city is quite international and so, similar to the plurality you mentioned, people here know other perspectives exist, but each ‘knows’ his own perspective is the right/best option.
Because of my current context I have not been challenged to think through some of the ramifications of pluralism that you have so skillfully described. You have helped me see where such relativity eventually ends up, and have thus given me what I need when I talk to secular Westerners about truth.
Thank you!


06.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten RagamuffinRese (3)  
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika

As others indicated,  your differentiation between plurality and pluralism is very helpful.  The paper, on the whole, does a good job of laying out the main points of the issue.

I look forward to further development of these ideas in dialogue and conversation.


05.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten Jim_Harries (-3)
Kenia

I have written a parable / allegory that attempts to deal with the matter of ’pluralism’, post-modernity etc. In a sense, I am seeing that post-modernity is taking us back to ’real’ missiological challenges that the West has failed to see for a few generations due to an excess of modernity. I am currently touring missionary training institutions and presenting a version of a paper. I would be happy to send a copy to anyone who wants to have a look and give me feedback. I cannot yet post it on the web, as I hope in due course to send it for publication - if it stands up to the criticism it is getting on my tour! If you would like a copy please email me at jim@vulnerablemission.com .


05.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten Emma_B (0)  
Südafrika

The key question I have is how do we penetrate our current climate. This is a great paper but I can’t help but ask the question - so what? The reality is people (on the surface perhaps!) are happy to believe irreconcilable things and have no problem with that. Of course we have to preach the Truth of the Gospel at all costs but what I feel is urgent to discuss is how do we do it so that we are heard and not sidelined. Another question I’m asking is - why does pluralism exist and what led to it?


05.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten Mojoe (7)
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ Emma_B:

@Emma


There are many different mindsets and reasons behind pluralism.  Although this is probably an indepth enough subject for a paper, I’ll add my thoughts.


Atheistic Pluralist - Atheists tend to be educated and motivated.  I classify them as pluralistic because their beliefs (although they will tell you there are NO unified atheistic beliefs) are based on people being gods.  Moral values are derived from the interaction between individuals and groups for the most common good.  in other words, it’s "what works" rather than an ultimate truth.  This group can be reached by reason, logic and HUGE amounts of effort.


Contemplative Pluralist - This is best described by the cliche’ monk/religious foci who spends the majority of their time meditating on who God is.  Usually this results in a limited picture of who God is, much like the leg, trunk, tail of the elephant rather than the entire animal.  Openness is option a function of the faith from which they come.  Some can be reached by the manner in which Paul used going to Athens; "Let me give you more information about the God that you are studying."  This is probably the easiest group to reach.


Lazy Pluralist - This is best described as "American".  (That is just a little joke).  It would be too much effort to consider all of the options and realities of God.  This is usually coupled by a lack of sincere belief resulting in a lack of enthusiasm.  In other words, it doesn’t really matter and there are other, more important things to do other than try to understand God.  This is most often due to a lack of consitant information/knowledge.


Good apologetics is essential.  With this, consistancy amoung denominations would help trmendously.  Most people who I come across use the same excuse; "If the denominational leaders can’t agree on what the Bible says, then what chance would I have" or "It can’t be true anyway".  We have our work cut out for us and without consitancy and sound apologetics, there may be some that we lose.


05.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten Jim_Harries (-3)
Kenia
@ Emma_B:

I have written a parable / allegory that attempts to deal with the matter of ’pluralism’, post-modernity etc. In a sense, I am seeing that post-modernity is taking us back to ’real’ missiological challenges that the West has failed to see for a few generations due to an excess of modernity. I am currently touring missionary training institutions and presenting a version of a paper. I would be happy to send a copy to anyone who wants to have a look and give me feedback. I cannot yet post it on the web, as I hope in due course to send it for publication - if it stands up to the criticism it is getting on my tour! If you would like a copy please email me at jim@vulnerablemission.com .


05.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten Maryedemuth (3)   
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika

This is precisely why it’s important to camp on the claims and life of Jesus Christ. He doesn’t allow for many paths. He doesn’t allow for a disconnect between morality and the Creator. It all hinges on Jesus, the way, THE TRUTH and the life.


05.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 1 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten Jonathan_Pryke (2)  
Grossbritannien

The distinction between plurality and pluralism is very helpful and important. Pluralism really destroys respect for others, for all its talk of respect, because it fails to listen to what the other is saying. At least the new atheists like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens are not themselves pluralists. They have that in their favour. They are making truth claims about the way the world is, and denying the truth claims of the religious, including Christians. They lack respect for Christians, of course, and many of their arguments are dogmatic rather than rational. So they also close off the possibility of dialogue, but by a different route from the pluralists. The warning about the totalitarian tendency of pluralism and atheistic secularism is chilling and timely.


05.10.2010
PhContributeBy
Antworten Kennzeichnen 0 Daumen hoch Daumen nach unten God_s_Child (1)  
Kenia

This paper has been so insightful. It’s saddening to see the number of people,especially of my generation,who don’t see the need of having a relationship with God.They are willing to embrace everything but the truth that Jesus is the only way to eternal life and that we can’t live our lives without Him.


05.10.2010
 << Previous  1 2  3 4 5  Next >> 

Sie müssen eingeloggt sein, um einen Kommentar abzugeben. Wenn Sie kein Konto haben, können Sie gleich hier ein Konto anlegen (es ist kostenlos und leicht zu bedienen!).

China

PhContributeBy Carver Yu  
 
Ort: Hong Kong
Land: China

Mitglieder sehen


Carver Yu hat keine weiteren Resources Beiträge gemacht. Um andere Inhalte von Carver Yu zu sehen, klicken Sie hier.

Anfahrtsskizze und Statistiken

 

Ansichten: 188124
Kommentare: 162
Empfehlungen: 6

Ein Klick zur Aktivierung

Kontakt aufnehmen mit Personen, die am Ressource interessiert sind:

Beteiligen Sie sich an verwandten Gesprächen

Exposing False Teaching ... Is it Divisive?
Exposing False Teaching ... Is it Divisive?
von WordTruth

Taking God’s Name in Vain by Careless Believers
Taking God’s Name in Vain by Careless Believers
von WordTruth

Generosity Exercises
Generosity Exercises
von Sas_Conradie

 

Nutzungsbedingungen | Datenschutzerklärung | Die Lausanner globalen Gespräche wird betrieben durch World Wide Open | Was ist World Wide Open?