'Including Exclusivism'

Over recent months, I have become increasingly aware of a particular response to the Christian message. It is a response that is characterised by high emotions, outrage or outright confusion. It is a response to particular claims within Christianity that are not necessarily set forth by the Church authorities but by Jesus Himself, which only adds to its spiritual potency.

The notion that I am referring to is something you are all no doubt familiar with- it is contained in Christian song lyrics, Christian creeds, heck you can even spot its effect on many a Christian’s lifestyle! Ever heard someone say, “Jesus is the Only Way”? Or perhaps, “If you don’t believe in Jesus then you are damned”? Most of us have, in one form or another. The concept that this kind of statement employs is known as ‘Religious Exclusivism’, i.e. a particular faith holds a monopoly of the truth. Many in our western culture look upon such a worldview with disgust, often believing that in a modern (and perhaps more sceptical) society one cannot possibly hope to believe in religious ‘truth’. Many prefer, therefore, to believe in ‘Religious Pluralism’- the notion that all faiths possess an equal facet of truth, and each of them leads the way to an ultimate ‘divine power’. The Bahá'í faith famously holds this doctrine, which in this author’s opinion is a major reason for its continuing growth among western circles.

But why is such an outlook so unpopular? Why is it that if you say something along the lines of, “All religions hold equal truth” then you are looked upon with a ‘pat-on-the-back’ smile, and a ‘how-tolerant-is -he?’ gaze, whilst if you say “My faith states that there is no other way” you are intellectually ran out of town? Well, I could give you an answer, but in fear of it turning into a rant I’m going to swerve from making this into a think-tank, but rather direct it back into the realms of Christian Apologetics. How would a Follower of Jesus, such as myself, view and respond to such well-formulated criticism? The way I see it, there are three particular ways in which this idea can be defended.

1) The Actual Concept of Truth.

There are many reasons why people reject Religious Exclusivism. One may be that they are a member of the aforementioned Bahá'í faith, or maybe their well-intended feelings for people not in the Exclusivist Religion in question have moulded their opinions. However, what one cannot avoid is that for some individuals a rejection of Religious Exclusivism is a result of a far more absurd worldview- the idea that “what is true for me is not necessarily true for you”. This bending, manipulation and the outright denial of the existence of an ‘absolute truth’ is a dangerous thing. We get into dangerous ground when discussing ‘moral absolutes’; we get into even more dangerous ground when discussing ‘truth absolutes’!

Of course, we must differentiate between preference and truth. The former is the equivalent of me saying, “‘The Muppets’ are the best thing since sliced bread”. Well, that is obviously true for me but not necessarily for you, and that is because it is a preference. For further examples I suggest you go onto any Popular Music discussion forum! However, to deny the existence of absolute truth is just a symptom of madness. There are several good questions one needs to put to those who hold such a position-

- If there are no absolute truths, then tell me what is the purpose of mathematics, science etc? Does not 2 + 2= 4? Is that not logically true at all times?

- If there were no absolute truths, perhaps you would like to be reminded of certain forms of suicide? After all, just because strapping someone to a concrete block with no air supplies, dropping them into an ocean and leaving them there for 24 hours kills most people, doesn’t mean that is true for you, now does it? Would you like to test that? Or have we discovered an absolute truth? Well Hallelujah…

- Finally, you say ‘there are no absolute truths’. Perhaps I should ask, is that statement true…? Gotcha…

As you can see, to deny the existence of absolute truth is just absurd, and philosophically vacuous. Now that this has been established, we shall move onto our next point.

2) The Conflicting Characteristics of Various Religions.

Obviously, some religions are going to compliment and support one another depending on their history, culture and statements of faith. For example, Christianity and Islam honour Jesus in one way or another, plus Christianity and Judaism share many doctrines concerning the nature of God. However, this is not what critics of Religious Exclusivism maintain. Some say that instead of being Exclusivist, more religious believers should try to be inclusivist, or indeed pluralistic. As mentioned earlier, followers of the Bahá'í faith try to live out such a belief. However, this sort of approach is completely and utterly flawed, although it is not without its appeal in such a divided world.

When one looks at what each Religion actually believes, and then lays out these beliefs into some form of grid, one gets the feeling that if they all held a facet of the truth then they’d be much more alike. Christianity and Islam may honour Jesus, yes, but Christianity sees Him as God in Human Flesh, whilst Muslims believe Him to be a mere prophet of Allah. Again, Christianity and Judaism may share many beliefs concerning the nature of God, but Christians maintain that He is a Trinity whilst Jews believe He is absolutely alone in every possible way. These kinds of differences outweigh the similarities, and although it is incredibly important to focus on similarities in fear of breeding intolerance, one cannot continue saying that all religions hold equal measures of truth in light of these discoveries. If indeed that were ‘true’, then truth would not contradict itself. To say ‘I don’t exist’ is a contradiction because I must exist in order to make such a statement, and therefore it is false. The statements, ‘I don’t exist’ and ‘I do exist’ cannot be true at the same time because they contradict themselves. The same is true (if you pardon the pun) for religious pluralism. A great article that illustrates this is found at http://www.equip.org/free/DB035.htm, and although its purpose was originally a polemic towards the Bahá'í faith it nevertheless includes a comparison chart and a general defence of Christianity against its pluralistic claims.

3) The Claims of Jesus Himself.

This point is obviously aimed more at Christians, but I feel it necessary to put in for a wider readership. If one is a Christian, can one also be a pluralist? I used to be, but I must say that as I got to know more and more of the Gospels I found it hard to retain such a view. The Gospels are indeed pretty exclusive, no bones about it! Jesus Himself was in a sense egotistical, but in the best way possible! He said many things that were very much exclusive, here’s a few examples-

- “Jesus answered, ‘I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me’”. (John 14:6).

- “Jesus said to her, ‘I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live…’” (John 11:25).

- “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life”. (John 3:16).

Jesus certainly believed that He was the Son of God, and that He was the way in which the Father could be reached. If one is a Bible believing Christian, then you must address these passages before claiming to be a religious pluralist. Some have dismissed them as bad translations, but that doesn’t stand. For those who don’t know, the New Testament was originally written in Greek and one can find an extensive translation guide in something called a ‘lexicon’. Looking under one of these, I searched for the phrase “the truth”, found in John 14:6. In Greek it is ‘aletheia’, and the first option available to us states that it includes “what is true in any matter under consideration…in reality…[and] in fact” (http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/words/2/1086017608-3387.html). This is important, as this particular phrase is very much exclusivist. Jesus could have just left it at “the way”, or in Greek ‘hodos’, which admittedly can mean “a course of conduct”. However, He did some serious qualifying by including ‘aletheia’ and ‘zoe’
(“The life”), my point being that any whiff of religious pluralism is blasted out of the window by these further two phrases.

I think what one needs to make clear before I conclude this article is that I am not advocating religious intolerance in any form. To the contrary, I would seriously suggest that most (if not all) believers should engage in comparative religious studies- I know I have, and I also know that it has helped me greatly in understanding not only other people’s faiths but also my own! Rather, what I am saying is that ‘religious pluralism’, the notion that all religions can hold an equal facet of truth, is a seriously flawed idea. Not only this, but as I displayed in my third point for a Christian to believe requires either an unhealthy dose of ignorance or just sheer disobedience to Biblical teachings. Don’t think that such exclusivist teachings are found only in Christianity, though- similar things are taught in Islam, various sects and numerous cults (e.g. Mormonism and Jehovah’s Witnesses). How then can we possibly hope to stick to the label of Religious Pluralism? Quite simply, we can’t!

My solution is one that makes many uneasy- simply investigate the different religions for yourself! See which ones hold up to scrutiny. Are defences present, and if so are they worth the paper they are written on? Such an attitude has led me to a strong and developed faith in Jesus Christ, and if anything it can inspire worthwhile and meaningful inter-faith dialogue- something that is, in the current world-situation, terribly necessary!

Of course an inter-faith dialogue can lead to problems, but I say that the words of Simon Peter stand true and worthy of recognition even today, and if we followed them then perhaps the said dialogue would be made that much more safe.

“Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behaviour in Christ may be ashamed of their slander” (1 Peter 3:15-16).