You know what the "Interfaith"-concept reminds me of? Conspiracy-theorists.

[DetlefK]

3. Well, a religion is an explanation. Right?

"Why/How does X happen? Well, according to my religion, the explanation is Y."

Ask somebody with a different religion and the answer is: "Well, according to my religion, the explanation is Z."



Now, to take care of problem X, what approach should be taken?
The approach that deals with Y or the approach that deals with Z?

How could this dilemma possibly be solved?
Collect arguments? What kind of arguments?
It would absolutely be bad manners to come up with arguments why the other side is wrong.
On the other hand, it would be futile to come up with arguments why your side is right as those arguments come from within your religion and mean nothing to believers of the other religion. Unless you try to guilt the other side into agreeing with you by complaining that not agreeing with you would be intolerant.




Okay, simple example:
One religion beliefs that throwing a coconut into the volcano will calm the volcano-god. Anything else will anger him even more.
The other religion beliefs that throwing a fish into the volcano wil calm the volcano-god. Anything else will anger him even more.
Then the volcano starts spewing smoke.
So, what is it? Coconut or fish? And HOW does one arrive at an answer? (Reminder: You are not allowed to make arguments against either belief.)




Another example:
I think it's outrageous that Jesus Christ turns into bread. That totally excludes people with gluten-sensitivity. Can't Jesus turn into something else?