"I am hearing less and less that exclusivism is false, and much more often that it is immoral

"No longer is it sufficient to defend the truth that Jesus is the only way to God. We must also demonstrate that believing that about Jesus doesn’t make one a bad person."

Wow, that's a sobering statement. In a series of blog posts, Tom Gilson writes:

The world has a big problem with Christian exclusivism—the belief that there is one God uniquely revealed in Jesus Christ, who is the one way, truth, and life for all people at all times. Theologians and apologists have defended exclusivism’s truth since time out of mind, but never so much as in these pluralistic and relativistic times. Recently I’ve come to wonder, though, whether we’re addressing the wrong question; for I am hearing less and less that exclusivism is false, and much more often that it is immoral. The difference is crucial.

...

Once they said, “You believe that Jesus is the one way, but that’s not true.” Now more often they say, “You believe that Jesus is the one way, and there’s something wrong about you—evil, even—for thinking that.” Nowadays when people ask themselves, “Should I believe in Christianity?” it’s no longer primarily, “should I believe it on account of evidence or reasons that may support it?” (an epistemic should). Instead it is an ethical sort of “should,” as in, “should I really accept this belief when it seems so morally irresponsible to do so?”

And so, "No longer is it sufficient to defend the truth that Jesus is the only way to God. We must also demonstrate that believing that about Jesus doesn’t make one a bad person."

In Part Two he added:

We need to recognize just what’s going on in this process. Stated simply, it goes like this: “I have a truth to which I adhere. It is my truth. I have chosen it because it seems to fit me, my identity, my experiences. It works for me.” And this is how many people believe everyone chooses their religion: we all find what fits us, our identity, and experiences. We all choose our own truth that works for us.

...

If what I have just described is accurate, then they believe that Christians choose our religious beliefs just the same way they think everyone does. They think we have found something that fits us, our identity, and experiences, and that works for us. “Fine,” they say, “it works for you; I’m glad for you. But how do you get off thinking what fits you fits me? What makes you think your truth ought to be my truth?”

So, how do we help people understand that Christian exclusivism isn't impolite but rather the logical conclusion to the Christian story? In Part Three he takes a stab at it:

Here’s how the prevailing idea goes: no religion has primacy over any other. The different faiths are just different paths up the same mountain....Wasn’t that nice of reality to give us that freedom? We can reach the top of the mountain through Buddhism’s eight-fold path, or by accepting the five pillars of Islam. If that seems a bit severe, no problem, we can follow one of the more relaxed forms of Judaism, or even the indulgent nature religion of Paganism or Wicca. Or if we prefer we could follow the path in which the loving God of the universe sent his Son to be humiliated, tortured, and brutally executed on our behalf. Isn’t that nice, too?

No.

That’s not nice, it’s horrifying....

If [the Christian story] is true, then it is the greatest truth of all history; but it cannot be true unless it is exclusively true. If the message of the cross of Christ is true, then in spite of its horror it is a beautiful truth of God’s deep sacrificial love for us. But it cannot be beautiful—it cannot even be true—unless it is the only truth.

Of course, I think one of the main reasons people believe that Christian exclusivism is immoral is because they think it leads inevitably to strife in a multicultural world.

It is important to show people why this fear is unfounded.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad