Ty for bringing the subject up!
Personally I wish that Christianity (and the other faiths for that matter) was more theologically and practically open, such that I could go to a Buddhist temple on Monday, a Sikh gurdwara on a Tuesday and church on a Sunday. I think that the Masons have had the idea of "one God, many names" for a long time now, and I like the idea. I believe that demonising people as "unbelievers" under the influence of the devil on purely theological grounds institutionally dedredes people in our communities, and that can't be a good thing. Interfaith dialogue and the promotion of elementary levels of respect and decency, human rights etc, is a progressive measure. I know that the critical skeptic (or the true believer) might ridicule the pet idea of 'many truths', but the idea of truth does not necessarily have to be understood as correspondence. There is moral truth, truths of practical reason, true happiness etc all of which are linguistically valid but do not relate to theoretical truth of correspondence between statement and fact. Maybe the argument about truth, if it surfaces, might implicitally support the idea that philosophical concepts such as "truth" or "human nature" etc, are utilised in expressions of power and serve certain factions whilst costing others - a point where the postmodernist might say be aware, be cautious of what you are told and sold. I don't mind too much if the term "truth" is used flexibly if that helps to promote cohesion and prevent conflict whilst all else remains pretty much the same! Don't worry philosophers and theologians, you can have your time with truth as well, it's just that possibly she is such a beauty in high demand that monogomay is strictly forbidden.
