Krister Stendahl's Three Rules of Religious Understanding

[Katzpur]

Originally Posted by ukrkoz

There is only one TRUTH. It is in-arguable fact.

The fact that we always seem to be arguing about it more or less refutes the idea that it is inarguable. Maybe we should be trying to understand rather than win.

[Tzaphkiel]

Originally Posted by ukrkoz

There is only one TRUTH. It is in-arguable fact.
As the result, there is only one TRUE FAITH.
True faith is faith based on The Truth.

The rest is arguable religions and only very very few know some of The Truth. But those who do, will not argue any religion as they know better than to argue to start with.

yes, i agree

[Tzaphkiel]

Originally Posted by Katzpur

.....while still arguing that a particular faith is to be preferred above all others.

i agree with urkoz.
this is the flaw:
the arguing
and the claim that one is above all others

[Katzpur]

Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel

i agree with urkoz.
this is the flaw:
the arguing
and the claim that one is above all others

I don't personally believe that the use of the word arguing (which wasn't actually Stendahl's in the first place -- only the three rules themselves have been attributed to him) means quite what you and urkoz assumed. I think it is possible to "claim, maintain, or reason" something on your own without publicly arguing the point. When you weigh the pros and cons of something in your own mind, you can be said to be arguing it with yourself. And if you come to the conclusion that you have made the right decision, I think that's fine. I respect anyone who is firm in his or her convictions, as long as they respect everybody else's convictions. I wish I could remember how Woodrow put it, because I think his explanation was perfect.

The thing is, I believe that spiritual experiences are, by their very nature, intensely personal. If I want people to recognize that my spiritual experiences are legitimate, I have to recognize that theirs are, too. I can't just say, "I have had an epiphany and I have reached a knowledge of all truth. Therefore, your epiphany is BS."

[Hannibal Flavius]

Originally Posted by Katzpur

Krister Stendahl was a Swedish theologian and New Testament scholar. He was, at one time, Professor at the Divinity School at Harvard University, where he also served as dean, before being elected Bishop of Stockholm in 1984.

One of my favorite of his many writings is Three Rules of Religious Understanding that I personally find very worth keeping in mind when discussing religion with people whose beliefs and practices vary. The three rules were:

(1) When trying to understand another religion, you should ask the adherents of that religion and not its enemies.
(2) Don't compare your best to their worst.
(3) Leave room for “holy envy.”

By (3) Stendahl meant that you should be willing to recognize elements in another religious tradition or faith, elements you admire and wish might find greater scope in your own religious tradition or faith.

He believed it possible, and I agree, to put all three rules into practice while still arguing that a particular faith is to be preferred above all others. Some people have a really hard time following any of these suggestions, but I find them very admirable. What do you all think?

I had a brief moment in time when I did that and everyone noticed. I went from being really judgmental to accepting others beliefs and everyone was so happy about the change in me, and then one day I lost it.


Still trying to get it back.