Is Christianity the only way?

What about other religions?

This is one of the most common questions asked today to Christians. This question essentially is that with so many good people in other religions, isn’t it rather arrogant and short sighted to say that only Christianity possesses salvation truth? On the surface, it would seem that this question has a lot of validity to it. However, let’s look for a few moments at what the claim of Christianity is and what it is based on. Jesus said in John 14:6, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No man comes to the Father except through Me.” Acts 4:12 is just as clear: “And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men, by which we must be saved.” (speaking of the name of Jesus) So how do we deal with this? The New Testament is clearly making a bold statement in light of the fact that there are so many other religions in the world that are seeking to get people into heaven.

Ultimately, it must come down to some basic facts. First of all, each of the major world’s religions all contradict each other when it comes to their teaching about who/what God is, what sin is, how one gets rid of sin, and how one gets to the next life. With each of these religions contradicting each other, how is it possible for contradictory faiths to all be right? It’s not. So how do we move to the fact that Christianity is the true religion that has been revealed by God through the Person of Jesus Christ? Well, let’s look at the basis of history for a moment. There are certainly truths in our world that are matters of taste that people can disagree on and not be wrong. Types of food, types of drink, certain clothing styles, certain music, etc…are all examples of matters of taste which people in general cannot be wrong about.

However, religion does not fall into a matter of taste. There are certain truths that are not a matter of opinion. For instance, math, science, and logic are all examples of factual truths and not matters of taste. Another category that fits in with math, science, and logic is history. Historical events are not a matter of taste. Two people arguing whether or not Thomas Jefferson was ever a president cannot both agree at the end that they are both correct. They cannot both be correct if they take opposite positions.

The reason is that history is NOT a matter of taste but a matter of truth and fact. The bigger question then is whether religion is a matter of taste or a matter of truth. The answer will depend on whether or not the foundation of that particular religion is based on history or not. In the case of Christianity, the historical foundation claims to be the historical fact of the resurrection.

Either Jesus did in fact die and rise from the dead in confirmation of His claims to being the Messiah and the Son of God or He did not. If He did not, then the whole faith falls. If He did however, then His words are true that no man can come to the Father except through Him.

It is crucial to help people understand that not all religions are matters of taste. Buddhism for instance does not require a historical foundation to be believed. It could be found out tomorrow that Ghatahma never lived and Buddhism would survive because it is not based on any historical claim. Most of the Eastern religions do not require a historical foundation and therefore can very easily accept all religions. Judaism does claim to be a historical religion that anticipated a historical person someday to come and deliver the nation and ultimately the world from its sufferings and sins.

The question for Judaism is has this person come yet? Islam claims a historical foundation as well. The question for Islam is whether or not it can make its historical claim in light of the vast amount of historical information that contradicts so much of the Koran. For instance, the Koran teaches that Jesus was never killed. This teaching by the Koran was written some 600 years after the death of Jesus.

Just look at the ancient literature and it becomes very clear that there are multiple independent traditions that date much earlier than the Koran that say Jesus was killed. Early Jewish sources, early Roman sources, early Christian sources, and some early Gnostic sources testify to this. On historical ground alone, the Muslim has a very difficult case to make. Christianity makes the claim that Jesus died and rose from the dead. The part of Him dying has been verified by multiple sources. More than that, there are many very strong and persuasive historical and socio-cultural arguments that could be made to show that Jesus did rise from the dead.

If this is the case, then no longer does the claim that all religions ultimately lead to the same place stand. They do not all lead to the same place because they all claim to lead to different places for one, and secondly, they are not all right. This being the case, I would then challenge the critic or the questioner to truly pursue a study of the historical evidence for the resurrection of Jesus.

Remember, if it is true that He did in fact rise, then nothing else can be true that contradicts this teaching. Just because someone is sincere in their faith does not mean that their view must be true. It simply means that they are holding sincerely to their view. Sincere people can be sincerely wrong. There is nothing about sincerity that makes anything true. What makes something true is simply whether or not it corresponds to reality or not. Therefore, the ultimate question still remains, did Jesus rise from the dead? If no, then nothing really matters. But if yes, then nothing ELSE ultimately matters.