From John Hick to Abu-Nimer: Theoretical analyzes of interreligious dialogues in the modern era

In recent decades, interreligious dialogues have become a focus for intellectual exchanges between religious leaders and many thinkers have addressed this issue. This article aims to examine the place of inter-disciplinary dialogue from the point of view of prominent thinkers such as John Hick, Raimon Panikkar, Leonard Swidler, Hans Küng, and Mohammed Abu-Nimer, based on the intellectual framework and approach they adopted in their scientific path. The analyzis showed that John Hick believes that the realization of interreligious dialogue is based on the two principles of accepting religious pluralism and the golden rule in ethics. Panikkar does not believe in suspension but in confronting the religious other based on a system and an approach free from the epoch that Husserl puts forward. By emphasizing an epistemological point of view, Swidler connects the issue of dialogue with another religious person to the definition of religion and stresses its law-orientedness. Hans Küng talks about dialogues with the aim of creating world peace by proposing a declaration of global ethics. And finally, Abu-Nimer insists on bringing religious traditions, spiritual resources and removing misunderstandings in dialogue with another religion and considers all three as the most basic steps in the realization of this type of dialogues.
 
Keywords: dialogue , interreligious dialogue, religious other, theoretical analysist, modern era
 
Introduction
 
In recent decades, interfaith dialogues have become a focus for religious leaders' intellectual exchanges, and many thinkers have addressed this issue. Views on interfaith dialogues have also undergone serious changes due to the place of religion in modern societies. These theoretical developments resulting from field activity and adherence to the principle of dialogue, which is one of the most important presuppositions of the life of the modern world, have been able to create a decisive role in many historical situations.
 
Research Question And Hypothesis
 
According to the said material, the question that this research wants to answer is how and in what intellectual framework and approach is the religious seer dialogue from the point of view of prominent thinkers such as John Hick, Raymond Panikar, Leonard Svidler, Hans Kong and Mohammad Abunimer. The modern era has been formulated. Although this research lacks a hypothesis due to its theoretical nature, there is a basic assumption that the modern era is the era of intellectual transformation in Europe, and different ideas and opinions have occurred in the area of dialogue between societies. The main stream of modernism emphasized the issue of technology and law and seeks to reform social systems based on democratic views in society. In the meantime, religion was somewhat forgotten in social and especially global arenas. However, many efforts have been made so that religion can at least enter the global arena as a unifying element and play a role in peace and creating a human space. For this reason, it will be very necessary and important to know the views that have been able to connect the issue of religion with dialogue.
 
Materials & Methods
To answer this question, the method of analyzing the main sources has been used. This means that the main sources of thinkers have been studied and the research problem has been investigated according to the main components in their theoretical framework. This method is an irreplaceable method mainly in library research.
 
Discussion and Conclusion
 
In the meantime, John Hick analyzes the possibility of forming interreligious dialogues in the framework of the theory of adopting pluralism to religion. A view that is against the exclusivist view of religion and seeks to accept another religion based on the acceptance of the validity of all religions. John Hick, influenced by Kant's epistemological point of view and relying on the golden rule of ethics, considers dialogue as a tool for proposing religious truths, which are the basis of a common truth in religions. The basis of these conversations is to explain the facts to achieve a peaceful and moral life. By dividing dialogues into two types of interreligious dialogues and institutional interreligious dialogues, Raimon Panikkar tries to show that intrareligious dialogue is the ideal dialogue in which a person makes room in his heart, thought and life for his interlocutor, considers him as part of himself that he is trying to complete. And it is to refine and strengthen him and somehow respect his value as a believer. At this level of dialogue, more religious experiences are transferred and both parties seek to give more depth and prosperity to their religious life by using the experiences of the other party. Accepting John Hick's theory of religious pluralism and using Edmund Husserl's phenomenological view, which focuses on confronting the issue of dialogue without previous assumptions and without any value judgment, he came to the conclusion that what causes the formation of interreligious dialogues is the confrontation with the religious other and the development of bio-ethics in is next to him Hence, what gives authenticity to interreligious dialogues is not the dialogue itself, but a structural dialogue that increases the awareness of other religious beliefs by relying on the ethical life and helps the peaceful life of religions. Leonard Svidler believes that the possibility of interreligious dialogues in redefining religion and creating a universal general rule. According to him, religion explains the ultimate meaning of life and living based on this meaning; whether it is the explanation of a transcendental concept; whether or not Hans, it includes all religions and their truths. Swidler, however, believes that on the other hand, we need a ten-point general rule that all worldviews are under. The meaning of worldviews is the human biological practices that can accommodate and cover these ten general laws in a way called dialogue. Focusing on the two aspects of responsibility and realism of ethics on the one hand and being influenced by Nietzsche's critical approach to ethics, Hans Küng has defined the path of interreligious dialogues to reach a general and common universal moral law. According to Küng, the declaration of universal ethics will help to reflect the perceptions of the absolute truth of religions and will lead to a minimum consensus for a long time. Finally, from the point of view of Mohammed Abu-Nimer, Abu-Nimer tries to conceptualize inter-religious dialogue in the direction of his main project, peace, and deal with this problem more pragmatically, unlike John Hick, Penikar, Swidler and Hans Küng, who look more at solving the problem of dialogue than the theological aspects.Therefore, the definition of spiritual resources and religious traditions as the main indicators/symbols have a wide power in the realization of interreligious dialogues. Paying attention to such commonalities leads to the elimination of misunderstandings and provides the conditions for better and extensive relations between religions.
 
Conclusion
 
However, five points of view, both from theological and philosophical and anthropological positions, and relying on the teachings of the modern world, have tried to emphasize the moral positions regarding peace and the tendency and encouragement of religious people to live morally in the world arena as the most important step. Introduce for the possibility and formation of dialogues. Second; they have been looking for theories that can convince the elite to participate in the dialogue. For example, Swidler's ten articles, Panikkar's classification of interreligious dialogues, acceptance of various religious ideas by John Hick, emphasis on Hans Küng's global ethics, and finally highlighting the issue of peace from the point of view of Abu-Nimer are all the main signs to persuade elite thoughts to accept and better analyze interreligious dialogues. In the current situation, it is global.