How can it be justified that Christianity is the sole true religion?

[IdiNaPut]

Something I always deeply struggled with, even during my days as a strong evangelical Christian, is the concept of Christianity being the sole path to God and to gaining salvation.

It seems a little unfair and odd that given so many people in the world will never hear about Jesus’ message, or for whatever reason follow a different religious path, that the same God who created these people would then damn them to hell. Surely God would recognise that different people may choose to worship him in different ways ans what is important is remembrance of Him?

Can someone give me a biblical defence or explanation of how an exclusive religion is fair?

 

[Todd977]

The Church does not teach that those who are invincibly ignorant of Jesus Christ necessarily go to hell.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

“Outside the Church there is no salvation”

846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.

847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:

Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.

848 “Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men.”

 

[IdiNaPut]

The Church does not teach that those who are invincibly ignorant of Jesus Christ necessarily go to hell.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

Thank you, this makes more sense.

I’m going to have to read the Catechism at some point…I’ve got a copy somewhere.

 

[ChurchSoldier]

Apart from the aforementioned folks who have never heard the message…

Gospel of John 14:6 “I am the way, the truth and the life. The only way to the Father is through me”

John 3:17-18 “He did not come to condemn the world but to save it. Whoever believes in Him not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already because they do not believe”

It is not exclusive but amazingly inclusive. Everyone who wants to can join. Those who do not accept Christ’s invitation to be with Him, and therefore don’t want to be around Him, get their wish.

Why do so many non Christians have an issue with this?

 

[IdiNaPut]

Apart from the aforementioned folks who have never heard the message…

Gospel of John 14:6 “I am the way, the truth and the life. The only way to the Father is through me”

John 3:17-18 “He did not come to condemn the world but to save it. Whoever believes in Him not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already because they do not believe”

It is not exclusive but amazingly inclusive. Everyone who wants to can join. Those who do not accept Christ’s invitation to be with Him, and therefore don’t want to be around Him, get their wish.

Why do so many non Christians have an issue with this?

Given the sheer amount of religions in the world, surely it would be easier and even more inclusive for it to be the case that all religious paths lead to the same goal (as per Sikhism’s beliefs).

 

[Praedicare]

In the discussion of this subject, we ought to remember three ancient distinctions in philosophy:

Objective-Subjective
Formal-Material
Actuality-Potency

Objectivity is as a thing is in itself. Subjectivity is as a thing is perceived by a rational being. Objectively, I am a human male; subjectively, I may believe I am a reptilian female. It doesn’t make me a reptilian female, really, but I may be excused for thinking it.

Formal recognition is direct, conscious, and assented. Material recognition is indirect, subconscious, and not assented. Formally, I may be convinced when I say “I am a female reptile”; materially, I am absolutely wrong. My mind will be in accord with reality when someone gets me to formally recognize what is so far only true materially. That person is very merciful to me if he insists that I am not a female reptile.

Actuality is the state of a thing being truly real; potency is the state of a thing being possible. Actually, I am not Pope; potentially, I can say “I am Pope”.

Within Christianity, this system of using good philosophical distinctions is very specific to the rational thought of Catholicism. It is helpful here.

A final crucial thing to know is the Law of Non-Contradiction. It is a basic philosophical precept that is common to all clear thinking. For example, something cannot Be and also Not Be at the same time. For another example, if “A” is exclusive of B, “A” can never be “A+B”.

We believe Christianity is the only true religion because Jesus Christ said so. We can see from the* undeniable historical fact* of His Resurrection that His claims were true.

These are the chains that link the Truth of our Faith together. If Jesus isn’t raised from the dead, Christianity is meaningless; if Jesus is raised from the dead, everything He said takes on absolute significance for all human beings. If Christianity (A) is true, by a process of logical exclusion it must be the sole true religion simply because all the other religions (B) contradict it in some way. The Law of Non-Contradiction holds here, as anywhere else. 2+2=4, always. To say Christ co-exists with false religions is to say 2+2=5.

Now, to apply these categories to your question:

What happens to someone who never had a chance to hear about Jesus? Objectively, as a rule, “anyone who does not know Christ does not have life in Him”; subjectively, the** individual** pagans, atheists, or whoever else, cannot possibly have known Christ. He judges them based on what system of virtue they* did* know, as subjects (persons).

Formally, they never knew Him as a person; materially, if they grasped some truths about life, death, virtue, sin, good, and evil, they knew Him in a shadowy way. After all, He says: “I am the Truth”, so any Truth in this world is a small participation in Him.

In actuality, Christ only saves those who live in Him by faith & love; in potency, Christ saves all men regardless of who they are or what they believe. Note well the distinctions. Christ saved all men potentially; He saves Christians actually, but exceptions are made because God is a living being, not a slot machine or computer that produces results based on exact numbers. He chooses, decides, and - most importantly - loves.

Now do you believe something Wet can also be Dry simultaneously? Of course not. It is a contradiction. So, when Christianity affirms, with the Bible, that the “gods” of the Gentiles are “Demons” (Psalm 96:5), and there is only one true God, what do we make of that? Either Hinduism’s many gods are true, or else this is true. We cannot be dry and wet at the same time. This is about basic truth. Believe it or not, like it or not, it is what the religion claims and it is logical.

We leave all things up to His Mercy. This really is a tiresome topic to debate.

 

[PennyinCanada]

Those who are merciful will be shown mercy.
If you fed me, gave me to drink, visited me, …

For when you did it to the least of these, you did it to me.
This is how people who have never heard the gospel will receive salvation.

 

[God_I_Love]

Well I think looking at the vast amounts of belief systems out there one must assume that there is validity in some parts to the beliefs. For example the idea of something coming before and creating or making this reality possible. Is there a guiding plan? Is there Truth? That’s what religion tries to answer. For example the belief in a higher power(s). Once one assents to a belief a priori it becomes true for that person. They won’t question it unless something comes before that makes them do so. So is there a Truth that we can know is THE truth? That’s what Jesus came to do. To remove the blindness that prevented us from understanding the nature of life and our relationship, or covenant, with the Creator. Prophecy fulfillment in the OT pointed to a power above all powers that is actively present (I am) that was not fully understood until Christ. The Holy Spirit has been the single most determining factor for the good you see and witness in the world today, which would be hard sought, in godless and pagan societies that kill for pleasure or violate rights. Love is the one thing that gives this life meaning and Christianity has the purest form of that. Jesus Christ.

 

[IdiNaPut]

In the discussion of this subject, we ought to remember three ancient distinctions in philosophy:

Objective-Subjective
Formal-Material
Actuality-Potency

Objectivity is as a thing is in itself. Subjectivity is as a thing is perceived by a rational being. Objectively, I am a human male; subjectively, I may believe I am a reptilian female. It doesn’t make me a reptilian female, really, but I may be excused for thinking it.

Formal recognition is direct, conscious, and assented. Material recognition is indirect, subconscious, and not assented. Formally, I may be convinced when I say “I am a female reptile”; materially, I am absolutely wrong. My mind will be in accord with reality when someone gets me to formally recognize what is so far only true materially. That person is very merciful to me if he insists that I am not a female reptile.

Actuality is the state of a thing being truly real; potency is the state of a thing being possible. Actually, I am not Pope; potentially, I can say “I am Pope”.

Within Christianity, this system of using good philosophical distinctions is very specific to the rational thought of Catholicism. It is helpful here.

A final crucial thing to know is the Law of Non-Contradiction. It is a basic philosophical precept that is common to all clear thinking. For example, something cannot Be and also Not Be at the same time. For another example, if “A” is exclusive of B, “A” can never be “A+B”.

We believe Christianity is the only true religion because Jesus Christ said so. We can see from the* undeniable historical fact* of His Resurrection that His claims were true.

These are the chains that link the Truth of our Faith together. If Jesus isn’t raised from the dead, Christianity is meaningless; if Jesus is raised from the dead, everything He said takes on absolute significance for all human beings. If Christianity (A) is true, by a process of logical exclusion it must be the sole true religion simply because all the other religions (B) contradict it in some way. The Law of Non-Contradiction holds here, as anywhere else. 2+2=4, always. To say Christ co-exists with false religions is to say 2+2=5.

Now, to apply these categories to your question:

What happens to someone who never had a chance to hear about Jesus? Objectively, as a rule, “anyone who does not know Christ does not have life in Him”; subjectively, the** individual** pagans, atheists, or whoever else, cannot possibly have known Christ. He judges them based on what system of virtue they* did* know, as subjects (persons).

Formally, they never knew Him as a person; materially, if they grasped some truths about life, death, virtue, sin, good, and evil, they knew Him in a shadowy way. After all, He says: “I am the Truth”, so any Truth in this world is a small participation in Him.

In actuality, Christ only saves those who live in Him by faith & love; in potency, Christ saves all men regardless of who they are or what they believe. Note well the distinctions. Christ saved all men potentially; He saves Christians actually, but exceptions are made because God is a living being, not a slot machine or computer that produces results based on exact numbers. He chooses, decides, and - most importantly - loves.

Now do you believe something Wet can also be Dry simultaneously? Of course not. It is a contradiction. So, when Christianity affirms, with the Bible, that the “gods” of the Gentiles are “Demons” (Psalm 96:5), and there is only one true God, what do we make of that? Either Hinduism’s many gods are true, or else this is true. We cannot be dry and wet at the same time. This is about basic truth. Believe it or not, like it or not, it is what the religion claims and it is logical.

We leave all things up to His Mercy. This really is a tiresome topic to debate.

I think I understand better now…even if I struggled with the English a little.

 

[COPLAND_3]

I struggled with this years ago, and as far as Scripture goes I found the words of the Lord to be very comforting when He said, *“If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not be guilty of sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin.” *[Jn. 15:22]

This tells me that for those who have not been given the truth of the Gospel are not guilty of rejecting it, and therefore would be held to another standard. And Catholicism teaches that God judges man according to how they respond to Him based upon how He (God) has been revealed to them.

Thankfully many of us on this forum have the fullness of the Truth of the Gospel available to us with basically no limitations to how we can learn it and live it. But with that awesome privilege comes a massive responsibility.

 

[edarlitrix]

religions found everywhere try to counter the restlessness of the human heart, each in its own manner, by proposing “ways,” comprising teachings, rules of life, and sacred rites. The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men. Indeed, she proclaims, and ever must proclaim Christ “the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6), in whom men may find the fullness of religious life, in whom God has reconciled all things to Himself.

The Church, therefore, exhorts her sons, that through dialogue and collaboration with the followers of other religions, carried out with prudence
and love and in witness to the Christian faith and life, they recognize, preserve and promote the good things, spiritual and moral, as well as the
socio-cultural values found among these men.

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html

The thing I dislike about some religious adherants is the attitude of exclusivity and even superiority that some have.​

Christ Himself condemned the “religious adherants” of His time who projected exclusivity and superiority—His remarks to the pharisees not only brought on charges of closedmindedness and even blasphemy, but they angered the “establishment” to the point of “seeking the means by which to put Him to death.” Orthodox Christianity is not about superiority or exclusivity; it is about truth, and truth is not subjective or “adaptable”
based on varying situations or venue. Unfortunately, we live in a time in which any proclaimation of truth is viewed as exclusivism, which is not necessarily the case.​

I understand that one must, with his entirety, place himself into a religious path in order to give the most and get the most from that practice. But
do Orthodox people believe, like the Buddha did, that there are several paths to divinity, and that Christ is not the only one?​

Orthodox Christians believe that Jesus Christ is the only-begotten Son of God, the second person of the Trinity, Who together with the Father and the Holy Spirit brought about all that exists. Jesus Christ took on the human nature, without ceasing to be God, in order to reunite man with Himself and His Father and Holy Spirit, in response to the separation that sin placed between the human and the divine. Jesus Christ is the only Savior, the fulfillment of God’s promise to mankind to bring about “a new heaven and earth.” As such, He is the only Savior and, as such, Orthodox Christianity—as well as virtually every other Christian tradition—acknowledges that there is no other “way” than through Jesus Christ, Who refers to Himself as “the way, the truth, and the life,” not as “A way, A truth, and A life.” Now, this does not mean that absolutely everything Buddhist is evil or demonic. Surely the concern Buddhists display for others, especially those in need, is a good thing. However, if such concern is not a reflection of one’s conviction that every man and woman, even the “least of the brethren,” bears the image of Jesus Christ, this does not negate such ministry, but does render it incomplete or lacking in something that Christ Himself clearly teaches is absolutely essential. Finally, if Orthodoxy is focused on the fullness of truth revealed in the very person of Jesus Christ, there can be no question as to whether or not there are “other paths” to salvation. St. Paul clearly teaches us that salvation comes through Jesus Christ, period. He alone is “the Way,” by His own admission. Orthodox Christianity does not subscribe to any notions that “all religions are merely different paths to the same goal.” In fact, I dare say that the goal of Christianity is radically different than the goal of Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.
oca.org/questions/otherconfessions/buddhism-and-conversion-to-orthodoxy

 

[Robyn_p]

Given the sheer amount of religions in the world, surely it would be easier and even more inclusive for it to be the case that all religious paths lead to the same goal (as per Sikhism’s beliefs).

That would be true if all religions were man-made.

But if God is the one that created a particular religion (which Christians believe is what happened) and He says ‘‘this is the only way’’ then to say ‘‘my way is just as good as God’s’’ is actually more arrogant. That would be like trying to get to a friend’s house, and after they told you ‘‘this is the only road to my house, make sure you take it.’’ saying ‘‘Nah. I think this other road is better.’’ Well guess what, you won’t end up at the house.

Of course, like others have already said, this doesn’t mean everyone who never had a chance to hear about Jesus is automatically damned. The only One who has power to save us is Christ, but sometimes people can in fact be following and serving Him without realizing it.

 

[ChurchSoldier]

Given the sheer amount of religions in the world, surely it would be easier and even more inclusive for it to be the case that all religious paths lead to the same goal (as per Sikhism’s beliefs).

I understand what you are saying and am not unsympathetic. I don’t mean this sarcastically, but I don’t know why it was set it up this way, but it was. I didn’t make the rules, I am just repeating what He has disclosed to us. He said He is the way.

As well, He will be the one we answer to after we die(2corinthians5:10 “for we all must appear before the judgement seat of Christ to answer for what we’ve done in the body, both good and evil”).

As you say there are a number of religions and God is sovereign and so can do anything He wants. But what has been revealed is the path to salvation is through Jesus’ death on the cross and atonement for your sins and mine. The question is not whether everyone in the world has access to heaven, just whether we will accept the invitation which was offered on the cross.

Good luck with your search for answers.

 

[petra22]

In the discussion of this subject, we ought to remember three ancient distinctions in philosophy:

Objective-Subjective
Formal-Material
Actuality-Potency

Objectivity is as a thing is in itself. Subjectivity is as a thing is perceived by a rational being. Objectively, I am a human male; subjectively, I may believe I am a reptilian female. It doesn’t make me a reptilian female, really, but I may be excused for thinking it.

Formal recognition is direct, conscious, and assented. Material recognition is indirect, subconscious, and not assented. Formally, I may be convinced when I say “I am a female reptile”; materially, I am absolutely wrong. My mind will be in accord with reality when someone gets me to formally recognize what is so far only true materially. That person is very merciful to me if he insists that I am not a female reptile.

Actuality is the state of a thing being truly real; potency is the state of a thing being possible. Actually, I am not Pope; potentially, I can say “I am Pope”.

Within Christianity, this system of using good philosophical distinctions is very specific to the rational thought of Catholicism. It is helpful here.

A final crucial thing to know is the Law of Non-Contradiction. It is a basic philosophical precept that is common to all clear thinking. For example, something cannot Be and also Not Be at the same time. For another example, if “A” is exclusive of B, “A” can never be “A+B”.

We believe Christianity is the only true religion because Jesus Christ said so. We can see from the* undeniable historical fact* of His Resurrection that His claims were true.

These are the chains that link the Truth of our Faith together. If Jesus isn’t raised from the dead, Christianity is meaningless; if Jesus is raised from the dead, everything He said takes on absolute significance for all human beings. If Christianity (A) is true, by a process of logical exclusion it must be the sole true religion simply because all the other religions (B) contradict it in some way. The Law of Non-Contradiction holds here, as anywhere else. 2+2=4, always. To say Christ co-exists with false religions is to say 2+2=5.

Now, to apply these categories to your question:

What happens to someone who never had a chance to hear about Jesus? Objectively, as a rule, “anyone who does not know Christ does not have life in Him”; subjectively, the** individual** pagans, atheists, or whoever else, cannot possibly have known Christ. He judges them based on what system of virtue they* did* know, as subjects (persons).

Formally, they never knew Him as a person; materially, if they grasped some truths about life, death, virtue, sin, good, and evil, they knew Him in a shadowy way. After all, He says: “I am the Truth”, so any Truth in this world is a small participation in Him.

In actuality, Christ only saves those who live in Him by faith & love; in potency, Christ saves all men regardless of who they are or what they believe. Note well the distinctions. Christ saved all men potentially; He saves Christians actually, but exceptions are made because God is a living being, not a slot machine or computer that produces results based on exact numbers. He chooses, decides, and - most importantly - loves.

Now do you believe something Wet can also be Dry simultaneously? Of course not. It is a contradiction. So, when Christianity affirms, with the Bible, that the “gods” of the Gentiles are “Demons” (Psalm 96:5), and there is only one true God, what do we make of that? Either Hinduism’s many gods are true, or else this is true. We cannot be dry and wet at the same time. This is about basic truth. Believe it or not, like it or not, it is what the religion claims and it is logical.

We leave all things up to His Mercy. This really is a tiresome topic to debate.

Oh Praedicare, I read all of your words so carefully because it was the exact question my engineer son-in-law asked me and I couldn’t explain it in words clearly enough. I thought I would send him your words because they were so succinct and something he would read because it was so logical… Then, you had to throw that last sentence in there. --“This really is a tiresome topic to debate.”-- and I felt deflated. Please don’t get tired of explaining. You have a gift you aren’t realizing…

 

[Abu]

IdiNaPut #5
Given the sheer amount of religions in the world, surely it would be easier and even more inclusive for it to be the case that all religious paths lead to the same goal (as per Sikhism’s beliefs).

“Ease” and “inclusiveness” are not part of God’s design as Christ proved that He is God by His death on the Cross and Resurrection which no other can show. This redeemed humanity from the cataclysm of Original Sin. No other religion has faith in a God who has taken a human nature, historically has been crucified and risen, with the testimony of many eye-witnesses. The historian Eusebius in his Church history, 4.3, 1.2, tells us that writing about 123 A.D., apologist Quadratus cited those in his day who had been cured or raised from the dead by Jesus of Nazareth – prime witnesses – long after the miracles, crucifixion and death of the Son of God. No other religious founder claimed to be God and proved it – not Mohammed of Islam, not in Hinduism, not in Buddhism, not in Taoism, not in Confucianism.

His miracles “were so frequent, the eyewitnesses so numerous, and the evidence so stark, that not even Christ’s enemies disputed the fact of their occurrence. Instead they ascribed them to the power of the devil, or defied Him to perform another one in His own favour.” (See Mt 12:24; 27:39-42; Jn 11:47). Apologetics and Catholic Doctrine, Sheehan/Joseph, Saint Austin Press, 2001, p 104].

It was this Jesus, the Son of God, who said to His apostles “he that hears you hears Me” (Lk 10:16) – that Jesus that founded His Catholic Church.

The justification is overwhelming that Catholicism is the fullness of Christ’s teaching and His mode of salvation for everyone, whether one knows it or not.

 

[Ignatius]

Given the sheer amount of religions in the world, surely it would be easier and even more inclusive for it to be the case that all religious paths lead to the same goal (as per Sikhism’s beliefs).

Hi IdiNaPut, welcome to Catholic Answers forums.
In reply to your post about all religions leading to the same goal, I’m afraid that’s like saying that since there are such a vast number of roads in the world, they must all lead to the same place. The fact is, they simply don’t.

May I suggest the you try reading The Catechism. After reading that let’s discuss any questions you might have and go from there.

God bless you and guide you on your Faith journey and your search for the Truth.

 

[IdiNaPut]

Hi IdiNaPut, welcome to Catholic Answers forums.
In reply to your post about all religions leading to the same goal, I’m afraid that’s like saying that since there are such a vast number of roads in the world, they must all lead to the same place. The fact is, they simply don’t.

May I suggest the you try reading The Catechism. After reading that let’s discuss any questions you might have and go from there.

God bless you and guide you on your Faith journey and your search for the Truth.

Dobro veče and thank you.

I am currently in the process of reading a Croatian translation of the CCC (wish I could read it in English but I think I would run the risk of misunderstanding something). It is a very interesting read. I wish I had dobe this reading a long time ago.