Should Christians engage in interfaith dialogue?

Answer

The response depends on the exact meaning of “interfaith dialogue.” Dialogue can be beneficial. When a Christian engages in conversation with someone of a different faith, they can often gain a deeper understanding and valuable insights. Learning through dialogue is preferable to ignorance. Asking questions about a person’s beliefs is an effective way to establish connections. Many Christians lack understanding of the beliefs of those around them, hindering their ability to relate and effectively share the gospel.

The issue with “interfaith dialogue” for most people is that it typically begins with the assumption that no religion is “superior” and that all faiths are equal. Evangelization or proselytizing is viewed as inherently arrogant and disrespectful, as it implies that all paths lead to God. For many, interfaith dialogue involves individuals from different religious backgrounds seeking common ground to address societal and human challenges together. The main goal of such dialogue is to come together to address the “real” issues affecting humanity, which revolve around human relationships and suffering.

Some nominal Christians accept the concept of interfaith dialogue because they believe that the core message of Christianity is love. These individuals consider other doctrinal differences insignificant as long as individuals lead virtuous lives and strive to assist others. They question the importance of minor theological beliefs about God, the resurrection, or the Bible, as long as there is agreement to love one another and collaborate to address humanity’s most urgent issues. They may ask, why does it matter if someone does not believe in Jesus, as long as they emulate His way of life?

For biblical Christians, the primary concern is not just horizontal (human to human) but also vertical (human to God). While sin involves mistreatment of others and interpersonal discord, the

Greatest problem is that sin alienates us from God and puts us under His righteous condemnation. (This is the premise that advocates of interfaith dialogue reject.) Resolving the sin issue is of utmost importance. Jesus asserted to be the ONLY solution. “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me” «Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. », (John 14:6).

At an interfaith memorial service following the attacks of September 11, 2001, various followers of different “faiths” (religions) participated. The “real issue” was pinpointed as religious extremism, violence, and human suffering. A person recited a comforting passage from the Bible: “For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God” (Romans 8:38-39). The excerpt, as recited, suited the interfaith setting. However, the passage, as recited, was taken out of context, as the last few words of verse 39 were omitted. The assurance is that nothing can separate us from the love of God “which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.” Those final words, along with the entire context of the chapter (which commences, “There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus”), are off-limits in interfaith dialogue. The truth of Christ divides see Matthew 10:34.

Ultimately, Christians should engage in conversations with non-Christians to comprehend what others believe and to establish connections. The objective is to communicate the gospel effectively. Addressing a humanitarian issue is also commendable, but humanitarian endeavors should always be pursued with the intention of gaining an audience for the gospel. The mission of th

The Christian, in obedience to Christ, is to make disciples by following the command “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:”, (Matthew 28:19). If the rules of the dialogue forbid pressing the claims of Christ, then the Christian should opt out. In most cases, this is precisely the situation encountered in formal interfaith dialogue.