How can there be just one way to God?

After our discussion this past Sunday night at Bible study about the exclusivity of Christianity, I felt that I should write a blog about it. If you weren’t there, we started a new series on “Some Common Objections Considered” where we are looking at some of the toughest objections against Christianity. This week we talked about one of the most common objections: how can you believe that Christianity is the only way to God? What about all the other religions? Isn’t that arrogant and offensive to believe such a thing? Another way this objection is often put is this: it doesn’t matter what you believe as long as you are sincere. All religions are essentially the same and all the paths lead to the same God. We talked about the most common illustration used by adherents to this objection: the 3 blind men and the elephant. Each blind man feels a different part of the elephant and describes it differently (one says the elephant is long and flexible because he’s touching the trunk and the other that it is broad and flat because he’s touching the side, etc.), but they are all describing the same thing. So the illustration leads us to believe that all the religions are somewhat right and somewhat wrong but no one has the whole truth. It leads us to think that no religion has the right to look at the others and say they are the only right one. What can we affirm about this objection to Christianity? Several things: certainly that peace, tolerance, and inclusion is a good thing to strive for. Certainly that many atrocities have been committed in the name of religion. Also we must say that religion in general does divide people because it produces pride in the heart that we have performed the truth and others have not. We should be quick to affirm that this objection corrects a Western cultural arrogance toward all things not Western in the past. We should also be quick to affirm that many religions do share certain ideas and concerns. But ultimately, I think we must gently and respectfully challenge this objection to Christianity based on several things. First, it requires us to uphold ideas that are completely contradictory as equally true which contradicts logic. For instance A and non-A cannot both be true at the same time. Christianity says that Jesus is the only way to God and the Savior of the world whom we must believe in to receive eternal life, but Islam says that Jesus is only the fifth of six great prophets, not as great as Mohammed. It says that Jesus was only a good teacher and the way to salvation is through submission to the will of Allah. These things cannot both be true at the same time. Ultimately, we must say that 2 + 2 = 4 and not 5, 6, or 7. Any truth claim is by nature exclusive because it says that the opposite truth claim cannot be true at the same time and the same way. So we must acknowledge that this is not just a problem with Christianity but with any religion, or worldview for that matter, because they are all by nature exclusive. Second, if in our effort to promote peace, respect, and unity, we say that all religions are essentially the same, we actually do great violence to each individual religion. What I mean by this is that to say that all religions are essentially the same, you would have to gut each religion of major teachings, even to the point where that religions own followers could hardly recognize what is left. Again, if you say that Jesus is just a great teacher of morals as all the other religious teachers are (Mohammed, Buddha, etc.), then you are tearing out the very heart of Christianity which says that Jesus was not just a great teacher but God come in the flesh and to pay the penalty for our sins. In other words, the cost of this kind of unity is radical disrespect to each tradition. Is that really what we want to do? Lastly, the inclusivism that at first seems so humble and peace-promoting is actually just a “covert exclusivism” (see Dr. Tim Keller’s talk on “Exclusivity: How can there be just one true religion?”). What I mean by this is that for us to say that all religions lead to the same God would mean that we would have to believe that God is an impersonal force who really doesn’t care what we believe or how we worship him or choose to live. In actuality, this is a very narrow view of God and who He is; it necessarily excludes Christianity, Islam, and Judaism because of their beliefs in a personal God who does make certain demands of us (which, by the way, is excluding a huge chunk of the world’s population). And by asserting this view as the one true view of God that trumps all others, it seeks to convert us to its view just as any other religion does. Though they often say how arrogant it is to say that only one religion could be true, those who hold this view (even though many don’t realize it) are in actuality saying that only their view is ultimately true. So, what at first looks inclusive is, in reality, just as exclusive as any other truth claim. That leads me to my conclusion: all truth claims and religions and faith statements are by nature exclusive – we can’t get away from it. So the real question is: which exclusive truth claim will you and I believe and why? Which truth claim, as we consider them, is most intellectually credible and experientially satisfying? Which religion will by it’s necessarily exclusive beliefs best lead us to be the kind of people the world needs – people who love their enemies, pray for those who persecute them, and center our reality on a God who actually dies for and forgives those who kill Him? I submit that Christianity is the best answer.