On religious dialogue

For quite a while, I have been wondering about the nature of a dialogue between various religions. There are many ways how to perceive such dialogue - the scale is wide, from missionary ambitions to its noetic values.  

The main question remains as follows (for people who define themselves religiously committed): Is there any possibility to retain the values, beliefs and principles of your own religion, while acknowledging legitimacy and validity to values, principles and beliefs of a different religion, when these many times contradict yours? 
Is not a deep interest and religious dialogue a mere, almost hypocritical, slogan? Motto of nowadays: Inter-religious dialogue. Who does not participate, is against peace on Earth. Do you say that your neighbour is not correct when he believes in many gods, while you believe in one? - You are not tolerant. And we - the progressive - do not tolerate intolerance. But who says I need to deny my own faith in order to live in peace with my neighbour?


I do want to learn about the neighbour. I want to maintain peaceful relations. What to do?
Basically, in order to have a successful intercultural dialogue (if we want so), we must at first accept the fact, that my partner in dialogue holds different axioms. Our premises, or starting points, are essentially different, sometimes even competing. Therefore, we can never reach a compromise, or some synthesis. We can agree upon particularities, but in general there can be no agreement. 
If we cease to understand this condition, any discussion on spiritual matters will be a disappointment, or even a catastrophe.
Only if we know, that we can reach no universal agreement, only then our discussion may bring some fruits. It might consist just of enriching our knowledge and learning new thing about the world, or, on a different level, may lead to practical cooperation in particular fields, where we can agree, if such a cooperation is needed. 

Ars disputandi of a medieval type, that aimed at finding one Truth (which led to the inevitable, and mostly prescribed denial of the whole religious system - method that is useful and needed when you want to clarify to yourself where you stand, but which is useless in a conversation), should be returned to its original meaning - investigation with no higher ambitions.