All Religions by Their own Existence Claim Exclusivity

All religions can be false, but not all of them can be true. One religion can be true, which is what I
argue for Christianity, but not all of them can be true because they oppose one another. Religions by their own existence imply exclusivity. Think about it… Would a religion exist if it thought another religion were the truth? Think of what is likely the most extreme example: Hinduism. Hinduism teaches that “there are almost no restrictions on personal beliefs, but in order to qualify as a Hindu, a religion has to (1) regard the Vedas as divinely inspired and authoritative, (2) accept the caste system, and (3) respect the veneration of the various levels of deities and spirits, including the protection of cows.”[1] Notice the wording in this citation: not that a person must do these things to qualify, but a religion must do these three things to qualify as Hinduism. The reason Hinduism is such an extreme example is because it is a polytheistic religion, having up to 330 million gods (to help wrap your mind around this, there are approx. 330,150,668 people in the United States), and also because Hinduism teaches that all religions are true.

When I went to India recently (2021), there were literally cows walking down the street like they owned the place. People walked past them as if they were walking past a human (I could easily picture a man walking past a cow, looking at it square in the face and nodding). Why such strange behavior? Because many Hindus believe that their grandmother’s spirit could be in the cow. What gave them that idea is a longer story for which we do not have time here, but it is clear that when one visits India, Hinduism is alive and well, even in regards to the caste system, no matter what you are told about it in mainstream media.

But since Hinduism teaches that all religions are true, it seems that this is the most extreme example to show that all religions by their own existence claim exclusivity. If all religions are true, then why does Hinduism exist? What is the point of it? It seems that in this case, Hinduism just adds to the plethora of confusion in religion, and should be dismissed as counterproductive. The point is, Hinduism claims exclusivity because it exists. It says that Hinduism is the way, which ultimately is every way and any way.

Since all religions by their existence say that they are the correct way (which is the case, even in our extreme example of Hinduism), then they cannot all be true. The reason they cannot all be true is because they all go in different directions. Think that if you wanted to travel across the U.S., would you use just any map? The map of the Pittsburgh Zoo, for instance? Or would you use a map specifically for the United States? Hopefully the latter. If you wanted to travel from Philadelphia to San Francisco, a map detailing the route from Athens, Greece to Madrid, Spain would not get you there. Similarly, just because there are a bunch of religions that claim to know and show the truth about reality does not even mean that any of them are absolutely true.

Either all religions are false or only one of them is correct. These are the only options. We know this through the fundamental Law of Non-contradiction. The reason for this is because by claiming that they are the one correct way to understand the truth of reality, they are claiming exclusivity. To express it a different way, simply by their existence, every religion disagrees with the other religions that are not themselves. For instance, if Hinduism agreed with Christianity on all parts, then how would one be able to tell them apart? What would be the difference if there were no differences? The fact is, these religions do disagree with one another, which is why we know them separately as Hinduism and Christianity, and not simply one or the other. The reason we can tell Hinduism apart from Christianity is because of their differences.

It would be inconsistent to believe that more than one of the differing religions are true, let alone all of them.

Take the example of Jesus, for instance. Some religions say that He never existed; some religions say that He never died (which assumes His existence); some religions say that Jesus died and He turned into a cloud of gasses and His body disappeared into thin air; some teach that He was just a good man and nothing more; some teach that He did not do miracles; some teach He did do miracles; some teach that He died and rose again; others teach that His body was stolen or hidden; some teach that He is the Son of God; and the list goes on. In employing the Law of Non-contradiction, we can know that each one of these claims cannot be both true and false at the same time and in the same sense. For instance, a light switch cannot be both on and off at the same time and in the same sense. Even if you have it “halfway” on where sparks are flying from the switch and the light bulb is flickering, it is still on. Electricity is passing through when points of contact are made in the switch. It cannot be both on and off at the same time. From the Law of Excluded Middle, we can know that each of these claims (or statements) are either true or false, without any other alternatives. For instance, the claim that “Jesus did miracles,” cannot be both true and false. But it is either true or false. We can know that this claim is true beyond reasonable doubt by reading the Bible and examining the evidence therein. We can likewise know that the claim that “Jesus did not do miracles” is false, based on the evidence.

This is ultimately how we discover whether or not a specific religion is true. If we examine the different religions and find false claims, especially in regarding the focal objects of such a religion as well as regarding the beginnings of such a religion, then we can assume that such a religion is false. If we examine Christianity for instance, and find that the claims made are based on historical events, then we can know that it is true.

The whole point of this article is that every time you are driving down the road and see a COEXIST bumper sticker, I want you to think of what you just read above. Maybe if you happen to stop at the same gas station where a COEXIST bumper sticker is on the back of a car, you can strike up a conversation with the information discussed in this article and the others that are linked in the underlined words above. In any event, pray for your conversation, pray for the person you speak with, that God will soften his or her heart, and pray for yourself, that you will know what to say and how to say it.

After your discussion on truth and being able to know what is and is not true, move from here to the arguments for the existence of God (and Here), then to the Bible being true and what it says about Jesus.

Written by Nace Howell through the grace of the Lord Jesus

[1] Winfried Corduan. Neighboring Faiths: a Christian introduction to world religions (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2012), 267.

Comments

The Evidence and Power of Testimony: The Apostolic Witness

What to say to People who Demand more Evidence for God. Why is there something rather than nothing? Glacier National Park. © Nace Howell, 2018. The question is, how much evidence do you require? Would Jesus have to come back and slap you in the face with evidence that He is God? It seems to me that there is a line we must draw. We do this in all other areas of our lives, so why would we treat theism any different? When a court convicts, they do so “beyond a reasonable doubt.” I would like to take a few moments to explore this a bit. But before we get to that, I want to pose a question, which is… why are you the standard? What makes you think He has to prove His existence to everyone individually? He already created the universe from nothing. In the beginning, there was a big bang. Seriously… do you believe your mom when she tells you a story about her day? Did you believe the reports of 9/11 when they were happening? Do you accept the testimony of anything you hear on social ...

Baptism is Not Necessary for Salvation According to the Early Church

Let’s dive right in. The Bible says in Acts 2:37-41, Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.” And with many other words he bore witness and continued to exhort them, saying, “Save yourselves from this crooked generation.” So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls. The phrase in Acts 2:38 that reads, “for the forgiveness of your sins” modifies the word repentance, not the word baptism. See more about this Here . What is interesting is that those who translate the above verse as meaning that baptism is a requ...

Using Guilt to Guide to the Truth

While taking a cultural apologetics class in my doctorate, I rambled along in a 30-page paper and in it, I wrote that, “I define religion as an anthropological system consisting of worship which is often filled with specific sacred rituals that seeks to appease or eradicate guilt.” My professor red-penned this and said that I am not yet in an authoritative position to make such definitions. But I was never asked how I came up with such a definition. The thing is, working on my second post-graduate degree in apologetics, studying many other religions on a deeper level was inevitable, and by this, I noticed a pattern in all of them which was the fact that they all seek to appease or eradicate guilt, including Buddhism , even though many adherents of Buddhism claim that it is not a religion . The point is that all religions seek to eradicate guilt on some level, because guilt crosses all cultures and times, to all people . Guilt transcends all people. The ...

The God of the Killdozer Operator, Marvin Heemeyer

While working toward becoming an apologist and a pastor, I was a heavy equipment operator. I have over 15 years’ experience in the field, focusing on hydrological restorations (stream bank and river restoration and water dam removals) and site development for building pads (ranging from houses to one million + sq. ft. warehouses). I say this because I want to show where the heart for writing article this came about. Marvin Heemeyer purchased a bulldozer from an auction which was a Komatsu D355A with an operating weight of 97,907 lbs. (this does not include the weight of Heemeyer’s fabricated addition). In the picture above, I am operating a Komatsu D155AX which has an operating weight of 89,300 lbs. (If I remember correctly, we were developing the site for a 550,000 sq. ft. warehouse building pad). Heemeyer then went on a rampage in his armored bulldozer in Granby, CO. I don’t want to go into great details about what led up to Heemeyer doing what he did, nor do I want to go into great ...

Self-tests of Some of the World's Religions

It is fairly common for a religion of the world to give itself a sort of test for truth, since this is one question that is asked of any religion: “Why should I believe what you are telling me is true?” After all, the answer to such a question will ultimately result in followers of specific beliefs and doctrines, let alone religions, or will result in a lack of followers. If a religion can answer this question posed by seekers and thinkers, and therefore train its adherents to be able to answer why a religion is true, this will inevitably help people believe in such, even if the claims are false. If there is no answer, this is where a religion will perhaps find more trouble for itself. Many religions make an appeal to a higher authority, namely, God , for the veracity of their existence and as a result, no one can question the truth from such an authority. This is correct in a sense, that if in fact God is making such a claim, then what is said or stated is true ...

Two Problems Jesus has with the Mormon Doctrine of Eternal Families

Mormonism teaches that those who are married in a temple can be married for eternity. In Doctrine and Covenants 132:15–20, we find the following: 15 Therefore, if a man marry him a wife in the world, and he marry her not by me nor by my word , and he covenant with her so long as he is in the world and she with him, their covenant and marriage are not of force when they are dead , and when they are out of the world; therefore, they are not bound by any law when they are out of the world. 16 Therefore, when they are out of the world they neither marry nor are given in marriage; but are appointed angels in heaven, which angels are ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory. 17 For these angels did not abide my law; therefore, they cannot be enlarged, but remain separately and singly, without exaltation, in their saved condition, to all eternity; and from henceforth are not gods, but are angels of God for...

An Overlooked Argument Against the Book of Mormon

The Book of Mormon is written in a style of language that was not used by anyone at the time that it was written and published. This style of English is called Early Modern English . This fact is an anachronism that I find to be severely overlooked by those who seek the truth about the Book of Mormon. Many Mormons will instantly write this objection off concerning the veracity of the Book of Mormon, even to the point of saying that such an objection is lazy and pitiful, while not giving any rebuttals worth their weight. I recently insinuated the absurdity of the Book of Mormon by asking the question, “Why was the Book of Mormon translated into Early Modern English?” I’m saying that it is absurd that the BoM uses an out-of-date language. A Mormon replied to me that the Bible has equal absurdities. He said, “Why is [The BoM translation into Early Modern English] absurd? Is it absurd that God uses a donkey to speak to Balaam in Numbers 22?” First, this is a tu quo...

Defending Christianity against Jehovah’s Witnesses

Defending Christianity against Jehovah’s Witnesses Using much of their “bible” to refute them “But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. 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 ” (NIV 1 Peter 3:15). In other words, LOVE THEM . Jehovah’s Witnesses Biblical Truths Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe in the Trinity. J.Ws. believe that Jesus was a “little god” (lower case g). J.Ws. believe in a different “ Jesus ” because of the NWT accounts. J.Ws. call themselves “Christians.” J.Ws. believe Jesus is not to be worshiped. J.Ws. believe that Jesus was once, and is again, Michael the archangel. Genesis 1:26 says, “Let Us crea...

Who Made God? Identifying Categorical Errors

A category is simply a distinct class to which something belongs… A set of objects that can be treated as equal in some way. A Macintosh apple belongs to the category, apple, and not what we categorize as an orange. Similarly, colors are in a different category than taste. When we say, “apples and oranges” what we mean is that there has been a confusion of categories. Sure, they are both fruit, but when you examine both, there is an obvious difference. An apple is not an orange, and an orange is not an apple. Macintosh, Granny Smith, and red delicious are all apples. Navel, blood, and Valencia are all oranges. To mix the two, for instance, to call a navel orange an apple, would be a categorical error, sometimes referred to as a category mistake. How Identifying Categorical Errors can Help with Apologetics It seems that simply learning about or being reminded of categorical errors can help us be more aware of them. We have all heard or thought of ourselves, the...

How to Show a Mormon the Difference Between the Mormon Jesus and the Biblical Jesus

I find that Mormons frequently claim that they are Christians, and that they want to be referred to as Christians, and that they have even recently sought to distance themselves from the word “Mormon.” The problem is, they worship another Jesus, and here is how to show them the difference between the Mormon Jesus and the Biblical Jesus. Before we get to that, some clarifications are necessary. Specifically, that they cannot even distance themselves from being called "Mormons." The Mormon President Russell Nelson said, “What’s in a name or, in this case, a nickname? When it comes to nicknames of the Church, such as the “LDS Church,” the “Mormon Church,” or the “Church of the Latter-day Saints,” the most important thing in those names is the absence of the Savior’s name. To remove the Lord’s name from the Lord’s Church is a major victory for Satan. When we discard the Savior’s name, we are subtly disregarding all that Jesus Christ did for us—even His Atonement.” [1] ...

Apologetics and Evidence

Search This Blog