Ray Ciervo Ministries

Recently, a friend mentioned that a family member told her that he despised the Christian view of exclusivism. He didn’t express it this way way but told her, “You Christians believe you’re the only way.” The implication was that Christians are arrogant when they hold to an exclusivist view. She also mentioned she didn’t respond at the time.

When we spoke later on I told her that he (let’s call him a cousin) was actually doing what he accused her of. “His” view claimed to know who was right, namely his. If you didn’t believe or subscribe to his view you are wrong. This is quite exclusive, too.

Christian’s ought not feel this exclusivist view is somehow arrogant. Everyone’s view is exclusivist. Muslims are exclusivist, as are Hindu’s and Buddhist’s. Even B’ Hai’s who claim an amalgam of religions are exclusivist. In fact, they “butcher” all other religions to make them fit into their broad view.

Despite the attempts of people like John Hick or Clark Pinnock, the gospel message is exclusive. Jesus himself said, “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him.” (John 14:23b) Although this doesn’t express “salvation” in exact words, it demonstrates the need to “keep Jesus’ word.” If a person does keep his word Jesus and the Father will come and make their home in him.

Peter’s statement in Acts 4:12 makes the case awfully strong, “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.” This is about as exclusive as you can get. Speaking of Jesus, Peter declares there is “salvation in no one else.” He then states the reason: “for there is no other [exclusive] name” “No other” is complete. He then qualifies it by saying “under heaven that has been given.” These and other Scriptures support the idea that the gospel is exclusive. This contradicts the claims of pluralists.

A pluralist is someone who would suggest there is more than one way for anything. The pluralist believes that Muslim’s, Buddhist’s, Hindu’s and all other sincerely religious people will find salvation in their beliefs. The inclusivist is similar in that he believes that the gospel message includes more than strict adherence to the message. (For more complete descriptions of these positions, read my paper here.)

Even these views believe they are right and everyone else is wrong. Neither the Hindu, nor the Buddhist, nor any other religion believes you can believe contrary to their beliefs and find salvation. Of course, all these views differ on their beliefs about God, reality and truth.

What they are appealing to is the “law of non-contradiction.” The law states that two opposite truth claims cannot both be true at the same time in the same sense. This “law” is part of first principles espoused by Aristotle. It is neither Christian nor non-Christian. This is part of common sense, law written on your heart which everyone instinctively knows it is true.

My friend, who is a relatively new believer, did the right thing by not responding. Sometimes, no answer is better than an incomplete answer. Certainly, it is better than the wrong answer. Personally, I believe that bad apologetics does more harm to the gospel message. More importantly, it doesn’t help in reaching the heart of the unbeliever.

The argument that “Christianity is wrong because it is exclusive” is a “non-starter.” All religious views are exclusive. The truth is exclusive. In our postmodern world we’ve arrived at the place where we want to believe that there is no one way to anything. We instinctively ask for “more than one way.” However, when we realize that truth is exclusive we have no apologies.