No, of course not. The popular view is the American one. Under the Constitution, all religions are treated equally. Therefore, all religions are equally valid. The popular view is that whole "blind men and the elephant" thing. They each experienced the elephant in different ways. This is proof that all religions are equally true. Indeed, many suggest that only in the embracing all religions can we come up with the proper sum.
The truth is that the world's religions do have a lot in common. I can't tell you how many times I've heard "All religions are basically the same." They say it because of the seemingly high amount of commonality. Almost all religions, for instance, are about a deity. Or deities. Almost all. Because there are a few without any god at all. Buddhism, Jainism, Humanism, and Materialism, for instance, all go without. But mostly there is a god or gods of some sort. Commonality. Most religions have a "hereafter" (except, of course, for Humanism and Materialism). Some take longer than others to get to. (A reincarnation system, for instance, takes a long time before you reincarnate to the "hereafter".) But a standard idea is that there is something beyond this life. Commonality. Most religions include the concept of a "soul". Something about Man that is spiritual. Beyond this existence. Some view that soul or spirit or whatever as also inherent to animal life. And a couple don't include anything beyond the present, physical world. But most agree on something like a soul. Commonality.
One of the singularly most common points between religions is the certainty that there is good and evil. All religions have a system of morality. Even Humanists and Materialists hold to this belief. And "Be good" is a common message. Whatever else we might conclude about religions of whatever stripe, they're all about morality.
Odd thing, though. Herein lies a key difference. While it is certainly true that all religions have a sense of "good and evil" and all religions express the need to "be good", they are almost all without a common perception of what "good" is. Oh, some share some of this and some share some of that, but none actually share a common standard of what is or isn't good. Worse, determining what any one group thinks of as "good" is very difficult. For Hindus, "good" is not eating cows. For most others, not so much. For Buddhists, ancestor worship is "good". For Christians, it's evil. And so it goes. While we all agree there is good and evil, we can't agree what that good and evil is or what measure of good and evil we must attain. For those religions with a hereafter, the message is "be good enough and you'll go to ... our good hereafter."[1]
On this point there is a singular divergence. All religions teach "be good", but Christianity alone separates "be good" from the hereafter. Christianity starts, in fact, with a primary message: "You can't be good enough." The proverbial bad news. The world's religions generally preach "Be good and you'll go to a better place" while Christianity alone teaches "The standard of good is beyond your ability to reach. You're due to be damned because you can't attain the standard ... which is perfect obedience." This is somewhat jarring, in fact. In contrast to the entire world's perspective of "I think I'm good enough" by comparing themselves to, say, someone like Hitler, the Bible says, "You are to be perfect as your Father in heaven is perfect" (Matt 5:48) followed by "The wages of sin is death" (Rom 6:23). So while other religions are urging you to be better, Christianity is urging a different path.
Given the thundering bad news, we are left with a serious question. "If I can't be good enough to get to heaven, what's the point? What can I do?" The first answer is "Nothing", but it, fortunately, doesn't stop there. Paul's answer was, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household" (Acts 16:31). And that is the only possible answer in Christianity. Not works. Not effort. Not even choice. John wrote, "But to all who did receive Him, who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God" (John 1:12-13). Not a birthright (as the Jews thought). Not by works (as most everyone else thinks). Not even by choice (as even a lot of Christians think). "But of God." Paul said, "So then it depends not on human will or exertion but on God who has mercy" (Rom 9:16). Radically different than any other religion. 1) You can't be good enough to make it to heaven. 2) Christ died for your sins and if you trust Him for that, God makes you His adopted child.
Now, it is unavoidable that Christianity also preaches morality. However, Christian morality is different at its basis. While the rest of the world's religions are working hard to be "good enough", mostly good enough to get to heaven, Christianity offers morality as a demonstration of an existing relationship with Christ. It is a result, not a cause. It is a necessary product of faith (James 2:14-17), the clear response of a grateful heart. We aren't moral in order to obtain a relationship with God, but because we have a relationship with God and wish to please Him. A completely different motivation.
Of course, I didn't get a good grade on that high school essay. I pointed out how world religions were alike and I pointed out how they differed. I ... compared religions. But the truth is that "All religions are equally valid" and "All religions are equally true" is a manifest falsehood. Can't be. Unless we are willing to admit "All religions are false and, by that measure, equally true", it is not possible for all religions to claim that their religion is true and the rest are not and still all be true. And when Christianity claims "Saved by grace through faith" where all other religions offer "saved by being good" while dancing around what "good" means, you can't say that they're all the same, especially on this key question. If all religions (essentially all) are about relating to the divine, you have to see that Christianity, whether true or false, is not the same. But, then, if God were to make a religion as opposed to Man making his own versions, you'd kind of expect that, wouldn't you?
________
[1] For those without a hereafter, "be good" has no object. Of course, for those without a deity, "be good" also has no basis.
1 comment:
This is a good article by Stan. I seem to agree with everything he says up to this point (a couple of years now). So an engineer from Phoenix, Arizona and a part time security guard from Kingsport, Tennessee still can think alike even though they live in different parts of the country.
You will always run into people, especially on the college campus who will give credence that all religions are equal therefore who are you to tell us that Jesus is the only way to God. They are happy when Christianity is put in its place when elephant illustrations are used. Below is an article about the blind men and the elephant. The ancient fable of the blind men and the elephant is often used to illustrate the fact that every faith represents just one part of the larger truth about God. However, the attempt is doomed before it gets started. Here's why.
http://www.str.org/articles/the-trouble-with-the-elephant
Post a Comment