This study is a Religious Educational Comparative Study on Christianity and Confucianism and aims at reaffirming lessons and fundamental spirits of educational materials by exploring core values of Confucian and Christian education in the view of open religious educational study stemming from recognizing religious pluralism social landscape based on understanding between religions and communication skills offered as core competencies of religious studies set on the ground of a general theory of curricula from 2015 revised curriculum that has been newly revised and at discovering ways to discuss theories and practices that can have impact on everyday eduction by looking for teaching and learning methods based on the core values. First, educational philosophy from the Analects of Confucius revolves around relationship between humanity and God. It aims to produce virtuous people such as gentlemen based on benevolence, and to move the community closer to united community. The ultimate purpose of Christian education is to help humans have good relationship with God and to recover the kingdom of God by raising humans to become volunteers that contribute to making humanity as disciplined Christians. Having examined the both sides, I concluded that the core value of the two is unity. Time period, starting point, and interpretations about Gods love or Confuciuss benevolence depending on the regions may be different. However, they both offer grounds as to why we should get along with others by understanding, respecting, and honoring one another with love for everyone. Therefore, regardless of their differences in focus, Confucianism on family and Christianity on every member of mankind that is a creation of God, both of their arguments can be classified under the same category of human study with the core common denominator being human, which gives us the most important reason why I and others should coexist. Most comparative religious studies maintain their own religions perspective. Especially, studies that compare two different religions arguments in the aspect of religious education have been extremely rare. In that regard, this study is limited in finding out a tiny starting point that suggests that unity, harmony, and concord in the perspective of religious educational study with harmonious mind-set through both religions core value, benevolence and love in the face of todays religious pluralism. I hope that there will be more attempts in religious educational field to look for possibilities of deeper religious education toward Confucian christian education or Christian confucian education through broader methodological approaches and moe extensive studies of the both and that more Confucian and Christian educational scholars will discuss on such matters and join forces.