Are exclusivists capable of dialogue? Muslims and Christians who face the fact that, despite all similarities, their religions are ultimately mutually exclusive can indeed have the most interesting, honest and constructive discussions.

How do Islam and the Christian Faith relate to each other? Since the Eighties, the theologia religionum has generally distinguished three positions: exclusivism, inclusivism and pluralism (or relativism). Aside from some alternative suggestions, these three are usually applied to both the religions now under consideration.

While the exclusivist views their own religion as the only true belief, the inclusivist holds that the other’s religion is true in part (insofar as it fits in with their own conviction), and the pluralist is of the opinion that all religions say the same thing in different ways or that they each, in turn, possess a part of the truth.

Inclusivism sometimes presents itself in the shape of Replacement or Fulfillment Theology, claiming that (some of the) elements that are present in the other religion in a veiled manner can be enjoyed to the full in its own religion.

It is often claimed that a fruitful dialogue between Muslims and Christians is impossible as long as both maintain an exclusivist view. Inclusivism is said to be far more open to dialogue, but does it not imply an unacceptable annexation? After all, one does not truly acknowledge the unique characteristics of the other, and therefore does not take them seriously. Pluralism is said to contain the ultimate open attitude, but does the pluralist truly take the other, and indeed himself, seriously? Considered at a meta-level, no one taking a certain stance is completely free from exclusivism: the pluralist shuts out the exclusivist and the inclusivist, etc. This is just as true for the person who believes that he, as an agnostic, is best qualified for comparative religious research. His self-appointed superiority also implies a certain disdain regarding those who are convinced that they have indeed received reliable information through revelation.

The two religions with the most reason for followers to enter into discussions with each other are surely Islam and Christianity. Not only is there an unmistakable religious-historical and phenomenological kinship, but the worldwide community also exists for the most part of Muslims and Christians.

Far from shutting out dialogue, exclusivism motivates the encounter with the other. While the discussions may not lead to conformity, transparency does not work as a divider but as a peacemaker.

A condition that must be met with, however, is an inclusivist attitude, always ready to seek the other in a respectful exchange of thoughts. In order to create and maintain room for that, it is advisable that partners in the dialogue agree beforehand on a number of basic rules regarding the manner in which the discussion should – and should not – take place. From an exclusivist starting point, seven basic principles now follow with their motivations.¹

1. Muslims and Christians have something to say to each other⤒🔗

Muslims and Christians have a connection with each other; their religions are mutually related. Muslims claim that Islam is the successor of Christianity with the Qur’an as a replacement of the Bible. Even though this claim is unacceptable to Christians, it cannot be denied that the same people figure in both holy books. And even though theological notions take on their own specific meaning in different contexts, Muslims and Christians share a set of concepts that is derived from their respective religious sources.

The message they bring also reveals that connection and the concern for each other: Islam calls upon Christians to follow the Islamic prophet Mohammed, Christians call upon Muslims to acknowledge Jesus as Lord.

2. Pain is inevitable in the encounter between Muslims and Christians←⤒🔗

The common ground between the Christian Faith and Islam cannot be separated from the context of both religions. Within the different frameworks the similarities between Islam and Christianity differ in their content. For example, Christians give a different meaning to God’s unity than the central Muslim belief in the ‘tawhied Allah’ (the unity of Allah). And the heart of Christian Theology – Jesus Christ, the crucified – is denied in Islam. It does injustice to reality and is disrespectful to say that differences between Islam and Christianity only concern different ways of expressing the same content. The differences cannot be denied, and it is exactly because Muslims and Christians have a special concern for each other that this causes pain: pain that we are not able to share the deepest convictions.

3. A double agenda is fine; a hidden agenda is harmful to the dialogue←⤒🔗

A peaceful meeting demands transparency. We need not be secretive about da’wah or missionary motives. The longing to share one’s faith with others does not make dialogue impossible. Missionary drive may form the motive for wanting to meet each other, it need not influence the way the dialogue takes shape. When both dialogue partners have an attitude of wishing to understand the other and to be understood, enthusiasm about the message they bring only makes the communication far more interesting. In order to safeguard mutual understanding in a dialogue, it can be recommended that both discussion partners agree that, after having listened, they repeat in their own words what they think the other has said.

4. In a good discussion there should be room to step out of one’s own frame of reference←⤒🔗

For a respectful dialogue it is necessary that the discussion partners grant each other more space than only what fits into one’s own frame of reference. Of course, Muslims and Christians both consider their religion to be true; for they believe what they acknowledge as God’s revelation. They each also have their own view of the mutual relationship. Yet for a good conversation, both discussion partners must be given the space to explain their faith in their own words and within their own frame of reference. The Qur’an is not an Islamic Bible; Jesus Christ is not a Christian Mohammed.

5. For a true encounter it is necessary that one be prepared to stand in the other person’s shoes←⤒🔗

Christians and Muslims who wish to enter into a discussion with each other should be prepared to step down and stand next to each other. If they are not prepared to do this, then they will not be aware of how they come across to the other and, as a result, will not be capable of interpreting the other’s questions correctly. If one is not prepared to stand next to the other, it could even be called unfitting to question the other’s faith.

This willingness to attempt to truly understand the partner in discussion is especially important where converts take part in the dialogue. Converts can be convinced that they have already stood in the shoes of the other. Yet this does not do justice to the discussion partner of that moment, because his own experience is being applied to that person. A convert can do justice to the discussion partner if he is willing to learn to understand the other.

6. It is disrespectful to use another’s religious sources for one’s own purpose←⤒🔗

When Muslims and Christians use each other’s religious sources to their own purpose it harms a fruitful dialogue. The scriptures of the other party are interpreted in such a way as to do injustice to the religion of the discussion partners. Naturally, reading each other’s sources, summarizing them and questioning them is no problem.

7. We live in a Globalized World: religion must take that into account←⤒🔗

We live together as Muslims and Christians in one country, one world. Living separately from each other is not only undesirable, but due to globalization it is no longer possible. It is good for a society that her citizens know each other. In order to form a true society, to truly socialize, there must be mutual understanding. From their own religious convictions, both Muslims and Christians should be willing to contribute building stones towards building a society in which all feel at home and are valued equally.