Reading: All Religions are not the Same

All Religions are not the Same

Do All Roads Lead To Christ

[Pre-show comments]

Lee Strobel: Welcome to Faith Under Fire. My friend, Mark Mittelberg and I, we're leading a discussion about spiritual topics with a group of six people who weren't Christians. They were spiritual seekers with different faith perspectives.

Mark was curious about what they would think of Jesus' words when he said, "I'm the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father but by me."

So he recited the verse, but before he could even ask his question, one of the participants blurted out, "That's arrogant!"

Frankly, I wasn't surprised by that kind of reaction. In fact, when I was an atheist, that's exactly what I thought about these exclusive claims of Jesus. So what's your gut reaction in Jesus' statement? Do you believe there's one route to heaven or that all roads ultimately lead to God?

We're going to tackle that topic today by hearing a debate between two experts on the matter. I hope you'll carefully consider their viewpoints, keep an open mind, and then offer your own opinion in your group. I have a feeling this is going to be a very lively session. So have a great discussion.

[Official show starts]

Lee Strobel: Do all roads lead to God? You've probably heard people say, "All religions basically teach the same thing. So it doesn't matter what you believe, because they're all going to get you to the same place in the end." But is that really true? We want to put that to the test. I'd like you to meet Kenneth Bowers, a member of the national governing body of the Baha'is of the United States and author of God Speaks Again, an introduction to the Baha'i faith.

And Gregory Koukl, president of Stand to Reason and author of the book, Relativism: Feet Firmly Planted in Mid-air.

So Ken, let me begin with you. Let me just see if I understand the Baha'i religion correctly. It says that God has progressively revealed his plan for humankind through a series of prophets. And those prophets would include Abraham, Zoroaster, Moses, Krishna, Buddha, Jesus, Muhammad. So in a sense, all these world religions are part of the same grand unfolding truth and, consequently, ultimately all roads lead to God. Is that a fair assessment, is my first question.

My second question is why do you believe that?

Kenneth Bowers: Well, first of all, I think it's fairly accurate. I would say that instead of all these different roads leading to God, another way of putting it would be that there's one God who has revealed the same path through all of these different divine messengers throughout history. And a metaphor that might be used to explain it would be that of say a school where we're the students and from time to time we get a teacher who teaches us certain lessons and then we progress to the next, and the next, and so on, and so forth. As to why I believe it, I believe that that is perfectly compatible with the religious scriptures of these great world religions.

Bahá'u'lláh, the founder of the Baha'i faith wrote extensively about this. And I find his explanation of this truth to be compelling and convincing.

Lee Strobel: Greg, is that the way you see things?

Greg Koukl: Well there's a fundamental problem, it seems to me, Lee, in this way to approach it. The question is whether there is really one path described here or not.

Let's face it. Jesus claimed to be the Messiah. Either he was the Messiah or he's not the Messiah. If he's not the Messiah, the Jews are right and the Christians are wrong. If he is the Messiah, then the Christians are right and the Jews are wrong. But under no circumstance can they both be right. When you die, you either go to heaven or hell, or you get reincarnated, or you get absorbed into God, or you lie in the grave, but you can't do them all.

Now, I want to point out here, Lee, this is not some small difference between these religions. These are differences at a structural level. In other words, these are totally different frameworks. It's like saying that a computer and a car are basically the same because they both have knobs and flashing lights. I mean, there are differences here that are critical. You can't drive a computer.

Lee Strobel: Okay, Ken, what about this allegation then, that there's a self-contradiction involved in what you believe?

Kenneth Bowers: Well, I just don't think there is a contradiction. And of course, what we have to do, one of the challenges is to separate what people who believe in the religions think about their scriptures versus what the scriptures actually say. And to use the example of the Jews and the Christians, for example, only one can be right and the other must be wrong.

Well, the Christian would say that the Jewish interpretation of the Old Testament is wrong if that leaves them to reject the Messiah but not that the Old Testament itself says something wrong about the nature of God or that it didn't originate from God.

Gregory Koukl: Yeah. Well, I guess people are going to have to judge for themselves, Lee, on this one. But look at the claims that Jesus made. Certainly, there are scriptures that are difficult to understand. There's no question about that. There can be a debate about these things. But that Jesus claimed to be the Messiah is not difficult at all. It's central to this view. That Jesus claimed to be God himself and not just one of the prophets, that he claimed to be the only way to salvation is foundational to his view.

Now when Jews reject that, I can think they may be mistaken. Okay, maybe I'm wrong and maybe they're right. That's not the issue here. My point simply is they can't both be right.

Lee Strobel: How do you answer that, Ken?

Kenneth Bowser: Well, I think, first of all, it is impossible for contradictory things to be true at the same time, and we don't argue that different contradictory propositions are all equally valid and equally true. In fact, we happen to believe that Jesus was who he claimed to be and that anyone who doesn't interpret the Old Testament in a way that would lead them to believe in Jesus would be incorrect. And so we don't say, "Well, the Jews are correct and the Christians are correct." We don't go with that.

With respect to Hinduism, for example, if you go back to the actual Hindu scripture, what find is that they're remarkably similar to the teachings of the bible. Now, it's true that over the course of centuries, there have been interpretations that have been added. But in terms of the existence of a supreme being, it's there.

In the case of Buddha, I've heard it said, for example, that he taught that there is no God. But of course, he didn’t. It's rather the contrary. He said that there is.

Gregory Koukl: This isn't going to work. And I'll tell you why. In Hinduism, Atman is Brahman and Brahman is Atman. All distinctions are an illusion. This is Maya. The only thing that exists is God and he's an impersonal force. That is classic monistic Hinduism. This is their belief.

No. Right now, I'm not arguing that they're right. Maybe they're right and maybe my view of a personal God is wrong. What I'm saying is there is no way to bring these things together.

Kenneth Bowers: Well, I think he's right. There are some right and some wrong interpretations, and one of them is an interpretation of the Hindu scriptures that it teaches monism, that everything is God. It really doesn't.

Go back to the Vedas. It really doesn't do that. And what Bahá'u'lláh is challenging people to do in his teachings is to go back to the original sources, and take away the interpretations, and the mainstream assumptions, and everything they hear people saying that it says. Bahá'u'lláh puts forth a very rational argument that that, in fact, isn't what the origin of these religions actually taught. You can go back--

Lee Strobel: So, Ken, are you saying that--?

Kenneth Bowers: You can go back and find a very compelling argument that that's the case.

Lee Strobel: But are you saying that when there are these discrepancies and incompatibilities between these religions that that's a product of later development or assumptions that people make, or reading things into it? Is that what you're saying?

Kenneth Bowers: Well, that's part of it. Bahá'u'lláh, himself, said that one of the issues with religion is that it has a progressive nature, that it is that as these divine teachers, as these messengers come, they do shed more and more light on the spiritual truth. And that's something that would continue into the future.

But the second thing is, is that the followers of those religions over time - particularly the older the religion is - tend to add to their own interpretations and bring in other things from their cultures and their own limited understandings and make those primary beliefs that weren't really part of the original teachings.

Gregory Koukl: Lee, there's a lot of truth about what he says about interpretations and the like, and I think we can sympathize with Ken's remarks there. But listen what he's asking us to understand though and to believe.

He's asking us to believe that essentially all of the major religions represented in the world today have gotten it wrong. And Bahá'u'lláh has gotten it right, and he sees what most of the other leaders and theologians of those religions don't see.

There are debates about what the meanings of these things are, but we have to believe that the essential criteria and the essential structure of these religions are just simply wrong to agree that they can all come together under the teaching of Baha'i. You can get books on comparative religion. They give the basic outlines from the primary source documents about what these religions believe. I don't think they can all go together. Neither do the people who are the major adherence.

And this isn't simply a matter of people just having their opinions and accretions of interpretations over time. These go back to the original documents and the original founders of these religions.

Lee Strobel: Now, Ken and Greg, there's a parable that some people use when they're talking about this kind of topic. It's about an elephant and some blind men who are feeling the elephant. And one of them feels the side of the elephant and says, oh, the elephant's a wall.

And one feels a leg and said, "Oh, it's a tree."

And one feels the trunk and says, "It's a snake."

Another one feels the ears and says, "Oh, it's a fan."

But the king sees the whole truth. Ken, does that shed any light on understanding what you're saying here?

Kenneth Bowers: I think it's an imperfect metaphor because what that implies is that human beings, without any help from God, or trying to figure things out the best way they can, and everyone's getting a take on it, and it's just as good as any other take.

I think the Baha'i faith doesn't really teach that at all. It teaches that God is very active in human history, has sent these teachers for our education, and has revealed the truth to us. So it's hard for me to buy in completely to that metaphor.

Lee Strobel: Okay. Greg, what do you say?

Gregory Koukl: I agree with Ken. I think that's a good observation because it implies that we're all blind. And in fact, if we're all blind then why should we believe the parable of the elephant. Because that's just another blind person leading the blind.

What's interesting about the parable is that there in the parable, there is a king who sees the way the world really is. And I think there's value here in understanding that human beings can get some things right, but there are some points of confusion as well. And this is why we need the king who sees all the way it really is to tell us the way that reality is so he can correct our misperceptions.

Lee Strobel: And does that king tell us, Greg, in your opinion?

Gregory Koukl: In this particular case, we have God who's revealed himself through the scriptures and finally through Jesus, whom the Baha'i faith looks to as a prophet. And I think this is great. Let's look carefully at what Jesus says about himself.

The curious thing, Lee, is that Jesus was not a pluralist. In fact, he was a Jew, which first commandment was, "There should be no other Gods before the real God." Moses offered that. There is one God. The God of the bible was not a pluralist. He condemned all of those other false religions of the time, and Jesus followed in that tradition, saying he was the only way of salvation. He didn't say that there were more people coming after him.

In fact, it's interesting that Bahá'u'lláh sees Matthew 24, which is Jesus' last major discourse, as a fulfillment of prophesy of himself, when indeed, Jesus only prophesied that there would be false Messiahs and false prophets that were coming there. You can read it yourself. Matthew 24. It's very easy to follow. The disciples ask, "What is the sign of your coming?"

At the end of the age, Jesus said, "I'm telling you in advance. Don't be misled," and then gives three different warnings about false Messiahs. And then he said, "I will come in the sky so everyone will see me." This cannot be misunderstood. But Bahá'u'lláh takes this as a prophecy not of false Messiahs but of him coming in the future when Jesus meant just the exact opposite.

Lee Strobel: Well, how do you respond to that, Ken? I mean, he's accusing your prophet of being false, I think if I'm understanding his meaning.

Kenneth Bowers: Well, that's exactly what he's doing. But remember, when Jesus was alive, that's exactly what happened to Jesus. Greg mentioned a little while ago that Bahá'u'lláh is making claims that stand against the received wisdom of countless adherence of these major religions, and he's just asking him to buy into this. [crosstalk 00:11:41] Well, okay. That's important to say because-- and it's also important to remember what happened when Jesus, himself, appeared. Because if it were up to a vote, then Jesus would have to [crosstalk 00:11:55].

Gregory Koukl: I'm not saying you have to vote. I'm saying you should listen to the voice of Jesus himself.

Kenneth Bowers: You said it's because it's against the prevailing viewpoints of members of these religions.

Gregory Koukl: Ken, I never said that.

Kenneth Bowers: Yes you did.

Gregory Koukl: I said listen to what Jesus had to say himself. Jesus gave Matthew 24 a discourse in which he answers a question asked by his disciples, "What will be the sign of your coming at the end of the age?" And the very first thing he says is he offers warnings against false Messiahs. Now I'm not talking about creation after creation after creation throughout the years. People can read that for themselves and it's not unclear at all.

Kenneth Bowers: Okay, yeah. But Greg, I've read the New Testament. And they should read it for themselves, and they should also investigate what Bahá'u'lláh had to say about that because he gives a very plausible and rational explanation for those verses in the--

Gregory Koukl: Yeah, but the explanation--

Kenneth Bowers: Well, you can say that it's wrong, Greg. But I find it perfectly compatible.

Gregory Koukl: No, I'm not saying it's wrong. That's not my point here. I think it is wrong. But what I'm saying is when you put the prophecy of Bahá'u'lláh, his interpretation of Jesus next to the words of Jesus himself, he isolates a couple of phrases from there about clouds, and power, and lightning, and things like. But when you read the entire passage, you see that those terms fall into a context of a greater thing, a clear description of Jesus' second coming with warnings about what the prophets who would even give miracles. There is a narrow gate. There will be false Messiah's. There will be false Christs. And Jesus himself will return to this earth.

[Post-show comments]

Lee Strobel: I can certainly understand Ken Bowers desire to interpret world religions in a way that diminishes their distinctions and downplays Jesus' claims to exclusivity. However, I agree with Greg Koukl. There are irreconcilable differences at the very foundations of the world's religions.

To give just three examples, polytheists believe that there's a multiplicity of impersonal gods. Christians believe in one Triune and personal God with Jesus as God's only Son.

Muslims specifically deny God's Triune nature and Jesus' divinity. To gloss over these differences is to gut these religions of their essential beliefs.

To me, Jesus' teachings are clear. He is the only way to God; otherwise, his death on the cross would have been superfluous. The issue, then, becomes whether we can believe Jesus when he makes this remarkable claim. And that's where Jesus' credentials become important. His miracles, which were seen by many eyewitnesses, including skeptics, his fulfillment of ancient prophesies against all mathematical odds, and his resurrection from the dead, which authenticated his claim to being the Son of God.

In short, I believe Jesus backs up his identity unlike the leader of any other world religion. And that's what gives him unique credibility when he says he's the sole path to salvation. That's my perspective. What's yours?