Pluralism and the Being of the Between

Through the use of metaphysical considerations to solve the theological problem that we consider usual to be pure through pluralism and intermediate existence as a theologian, through training rather than philosopher training, the boundary between two so-called research fields I hope to find out. I am begging for an intersection. Theologians often use philosophy to cross over infamous borders, create problems and produce answers by their hands. My goal is to explore the possibility of relocating religious dialogue using metaphysics.

Religious pluralism is a kind of values, cultural or religious ideology that proactively welcomes religious encounters. It is often explained as an open attitude between affiliated organizations of different religions. Religious pluralism is premised on religious diversity, but religious diversity does not guarantee religious pluralism. Inter-religious dialogue and religious inter-program are examples of religious pluralism deliberately developed by individuals and organizations, claiming to be useful for conflict resolution, citizen participation and integration of the community.

Religious pluralism is not simply the existence of two or more religions. It can be defined as pluralism, not only to accept each other 's religion, but also to accept them. It understands and accepts that all religions have good ones. It teaches not only to coexist with us but also to learn from other religions. Religious pluralism promotes tolerance, respect, harmony among different religions. But this does not mean to give up on your religious beliefs to accept other belief systems.

In this article, I will only focus on the second aspect, the challenge between religious religiousism. From the perspective of religious theology and philosophy there are three well-known relationship patterns among many different religious beliefs. Foreigner phobia, comprehensiveness and pluralism. These theories are based mainly on epistemological considerations. As long as both insist on a particular religious advantage, monopolisticism and comprehensiveness are related models and they are not related to the point that other religions are comprehensive, not faithful to exclusuors in their core principles . For the time being, it is partially unrealistic. At the heart of the term "core rhythm", at least the following assumptions are included. (I) The assertion of multiple competing religious truths is a fact to be accepted, 4 (ii) religious elements not universally recognized