"Are all religions true?" A Catholic Article Says Just Saying This Doesn't Make Sense

  • Thread starter Thread starter mdgspencer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It’s a contradictory statement, too. How can Islam, which denies Jesus was crucified and denies that he is God, be just as true as Christianity which believes Jesus WAS crucified and that he is God? How can Abrahamic religions, which believe in one God, be just as true as pagan ones that believe many gods? How can men be appointed to die once, and be reincarnated? There are so many logical problems with the claim “all religions are true”.
 
Perhaps they all are heavily influenced by time and culture.
 
So the question comes down to what you consider to be the “religion.” If by the religion, you mean the particular set of parables and tales that make up each of the diverse canons around the world, then yes, it is self-evident that there are contradictions between those tales.

However, if what you mean by “religion” is the spiritual truths those parables represent, then the answer becomes much less obvious.

For instance, let’s say there is an apparent contradiction between the teachings of Jesus and the teachings of the Buddha. There are three possibilities here:
  1. Jesus was wrong (not likely)
  2. The Buddha was wrong (also not very likely)
  3. We are wrong in how we are interpreting either Jesus or the Buddha, or both
There is a famous Zen koan in which the student is presented with a similar conundrum. The Buddha said that all things have Buddha Nature. But when Zen Master Joshu was asked if a dog has Buddha Nature, he replied “Mu” (no). So who is correct, the historical founder of Buddhism, or the greatest Zen Master who ever lived?

A student who has mastered the koan will understand that even in the case of a yes/no question in which one answers yes, and the other answers no, both can be simultaneously and equally correct when viewed the proper way.

In the case of the three possibilities I outlined earlier, I think claiming that there are contradictions between religions is actually a very bold assertion.

The world’s major religions are so widespread because they speak to something deep and profound within man. Even if you don’t agree with a particular religion, it seems quite clear that its founder had enough insight into spiritual realities to endow its teachings with a gravitas that keeps people following them in pursuit of a deep spiritual yearning, even after centuries or even millennia. That’s more than can be said for many, much more shallow, “philosophies” or even the works of other spiritual writers.

So if you claim you have found contradictions between religions, you are asserting that you, personally, fully understand the teachings of both religions, and you have a deeper insight into spiritual reality than at least one of the founders of the religions in question. All of whom, I will repeat, are renowned throughout human history for their profound insights into spiritual realities.

Personally, I think that is a very bold claim. Maybe it is true. But it’s not something that I, myself, would be comfortable asserting.
 
Last edited:
God Is… Jesus Is…

Obeying God’s Command of LOVE in Action - is the one and only True Religion
 
White_Tree said:
So if you claim you have found contradictions between religions, you are asserting that you, personally, fully understand the teachings of both religions, and you have a deeper insight into spiritual reality than at least one of the founders of the religions in question. All of whom, I will repeat, are renowned throughout human history for their profound insights into spiritual realities.

Personally, I think that is a very bold claim. Maybe it is true. But it’s not something that I, myself, would be comfortable asserting.
Click to expand...
At the first sight it might look humble and wise.

And indeed, the Scholastics recommended not rushing to declare that two authorities contradict, but to look for ways to reconcile them, to find suitable distinctions.

But here we have something else.

Let’s look at your example:
White_Tree said:
For instance, let’s say there is an apparent contradiction between the teachings of Jesus and the teachings of the Buddha. There are three possibilities here:
  1. Jesus was wrong (not likely)
  2. The Buddha was wrong (also not very likely)
  3. We are wrong in how we are interpreting either Jesus or the Buddha, or both
Click to expand...
And let’s see what those possibilities actually mean.

You are saying that it is more likely that followers of Jesus and Buddha, after long studies, misunderstand their teachings, than that you, “White_Tree”, misjudged them.

When we formulate that in such a way, your position does not look quite as humble, does it…? 🙂

If only you had supported it in some way other than that merely apparent humility…
 
Dan_Defender said:
Truth is not relative.
Click to expand...
Oh but what is truly moral is relative to the times the culture.
At one point in time it was true that capital punishment was acceptable.
At another point in time it is true that capital punishment is not acceptable.
At one point in time it was true that the creed stated that the Holy spirit proceeds from the Father.
At another point in time it was true that the creed stated that the Holy spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son.
At one point in time it is true that slaves were taught to be subject to their masters with all fear and to obey those who are unfair.
At another point in time it is true that slaves are taught that it is wrong to be required to be subject to their masters.
Also the truth about whether or not women should wear headcovering in church is relative to the times. Should there be dancing near the church altar at the time that a Mass is scheduled. At one time it was true that there should not be such. At other times, it is true that such is allowed. Similarly with topless women speaking at a papal mass.
 
The Truth didn’t change. Our understanding of the Truth changed. I leave it at that. You’re not gonna get an endless debate from me.
 
Dan_Defender said:
The Truth didn’t change.
Click to expand...
I think that the examples clearly show that there has been a radical change in the truth. in particular concerning the morality of capital punishment. It is all relative to the culture and to the times.
 
Hmm. As far as I know, if a Bhuddist comes to believe in God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, that is a major change in that person’s life. They follow Jesus Christ and leave the rest behind, as did Christians through the ages. This Bhuddist-Christian combo, it must be a relatively new adaptation. More philosophy than belief.
 
I think the Catholics on a Catholic forum already know this.
 
Your examples don’t accurately portray the understanding of truth or something which is believed to be true. Some have attempted to reinterpret certain truths but the truths themselves don’t change.
 
EndTimes said:
God Is… Jesus Is…

Obeying God’s Command of LOVE in Action - is the one and only True Religion
Click to expand...
That’s a relativistic mindset with regards to Scripture and especially salvation. Merely loving one another, however great in practice this action is, is not the only thing we are required to do to attain Heaven.
 
Crusader13 said:
the truths themselves don’t change.
Click to expand...
OK. What is the truth about the morality of capital punishment, in particular burning people alive at the stake? and the morality of torture. Is it true that these are wrong or are these sometimes right and sometimes wrong depending on the culture and depending on the circumstances?
Is lying always wrong, or is it OK under the certain conditions such as to save a young lady from being sent to the gas chambers. Many examples show that truth is not absolute but does change depending on the circumstances.
 
Last edited:
Crusader13 said:
That’s a relativistic mindset with regards to Scripture and especially salvation. Merely loving one another, however great in practice this action is, is not the only thing we are required to do to attain Heaven.
Click to expand...
No…

It’s not merely – It’s a definitive Teaching in the Scriptures.

How does One “inherit eternal life” ? check it out . The Entire Good Samaritan Parable …

By Obeying God’s Commend - to Love One Another…

IN Action is underscored by JESUS - where in several Scriptural passages
He is very clear How and Why He’ll separate the Goats from the Sheep at Judgement

LOVE ONE ANOTHER IN ACTION
 
Last edited:
You’re attempting to include the application of morality with regards to an individuals actions in unique circumstances.

So to claim lying is always wrong, is not an absolute truth.

The issue of Capital punishment can’t be considered immoral, when it’s very practice was detailed by God Himself. With regards to the change in our catechism, it doesn’t imply that the action was always immoral, but according to Pope Francis it is no longer applicable in today’s society.

The truth of its action didn’t change, just its application. Which is debatable.
 
Last edited:
Well I don’t want to misunderstand the point you’re making, but you’re of the belief that all religions lead to Heaven, so long as we love each other?
 
Crusader13 said:
You’re attempting to include the application of morality with regards to an individuals actions in unique circumstances.
Click to expand...
That is because what is truly right and truly wrong will change depending on the circumstances. At one time it was taught that torture was justified under certain conditions, now it is taught that it is not so. Similarly with slavery.
If truth does not change, please tell us whether or not slaves should be subject to their masters even if they are unfair.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top