Traditores

Traitors for Christ

Menu
  • Home
  • Traditores Radio
  • About
    • About Traditores
    • Beliefs
    • Credits
  • Sermons
    • Sermon Audio
    • Sermon Notes
    • 2013-Present Audio
    • 2012 & 2011 Audio
    • 2010 Audio
    • 2009 Audio
  • Bible Reading
    • All 66 in One Year
    • All 66 in One Year (Mobile)
    • NT in One Year
    • NT In One Year (Mobile)
    • All 66 in One Leap Year
  • Contact Us
Menu
Bono Coexist

Quick Arguments Against Pluralism

Posted on July 15, 2012July 15, 2012 by Alan

Bono CoexistOverall it seems that arguing with pluralism is like pushing against the wind. If a pluralist will not even concede the validity of the law of non-contradiction, there is nothing to "push against" to even begin an argument against pluralism. Having said that, there are two approaches: one for a believer, and one for an unbeliever.

With a believer it should be noted that Jesus Himself did not allow for "multiple paths" to salvation. For instance, He unequivocally states, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me" (John 14:6, ESV, emphasis added). Additionally, Christ makes it clear the only alternative to that choice is condemnation (John 3:18). Of course, Jesus' words were not new—the Old Testament is also very clear that there is only one path, for example: "You shall have no other gods before me" (Ex. 20:3). Additionally, it shows no respect for "alternatives"—a great example is Elijah mocking the prophets of Baal in 1 Kings 18:20-40. If pluralism has any claim, how unenlightened it was for Elijah to ridicule someone else's valid faith-path.

No—a believer has no choice but to proclaim there is but one (specific) way to salvation.

With non-believers, first there has to be agreement that (a) there is truth; (b) truth can be known; and (c) truth does not contradict itself. If a pluralist disagrees with any of those, the main argument against him or her is that all nature, physics, etcetera oppose their view. How can someone logically apply different standards in the spiritual realm than those which are axiomatic and perpetually confirmed in the physical one? If the discussion is able to get past that fundamental step, then pluralism will collapse on itself since multiple major religions claim exclusivity. As such, at most one of those can be right (although all may be wrong).

A believer has no choice but to assert a single (specific) path to salvation, and a non-believer, if he or she does not give up basic logic, must choose one—and choose wisely.

[ This is a slightly edited version of a short critique I had as an assignment for Liberty University. ]

P.S. Of course, none of this does not mean various religions cannot "coexist." But "tolerance" means "tolerate," not "accept." It would be foolish to pretend somehow how all the religions in the normal coexist image can all be right…


Image of Bono with coexist found on photobucket.com. I could not find the original, but clearly the photobucket.com one isn’t it…

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Traditores needs some spring cleaning, which we'll slowly do over the winter and spring. Thank you for your patience...

Traitorous Site Search

Traitorous Favorites

  • Strasburg Church of Christ
  • Conversations About God

Traitorous Bible Search


Shorten Bible Ref (ESV.to)

Traitorous Categories

Traitorous Tags

Atheism Behavior Bible C.S. Lewis Christian Living Christmas Church Creation Culture Death Doubt Eternity Faith Forgiveness God God's Love Gospel Government Hell Holidays Homosexuality Incarnation Jesus Judgement Judgment Love Pagan Persecution Politics Pornography Prayer Providence Repentance Resurrection Salvation Science Second Coming Sin Society Temptation The Cross Theology Trust Worldview Worship

Traitorous Archive

©2009-2022 Alan Fahrner