This document discusses and critiques pluralism and exclusivism in religion. It defines pluralism as the belief that all religions are true, while exclusivism is the belief that only one religion is true. The document analyzes John Hick's argument that religions should be viewed equally based on their moral teachings. However, several responses note that moral behavior does not prove religious truth claims. The document concludes that pluralism's view of truth is self-defeating, as it denies any single religion could be exclusively true while claiming its own view is correct.

1. Chapter 8Chapter 8
Exclusivism: The Oppositional PreconditionExclusivism: The Oppositional Precondition
PowerPoint Presentation Prepared by Mark E. Hardgrove, D.Min., Ph.D.

2. • Pluralism:Pluralism: the belief that every religion isthe belief that every religion is
true, that each provides a genuine encountertrue, that each provides a genuine encounter
with the Ultimate. One may be better thanwith the Ultimate. One may be better than
the others, but all are adequate.the others, but all are adequate.
• Relativism:Relativism: Claims that each religion is trueClaims that each religion is true
to the individual who holds it. They believeto the individual who holds it. They believe
that since there is no objective truth inthat since there is no objective truth in
religion, there are no criteria by which onereligion, there are no criteria by which one
can tell which religion is true or whichcan tell which religion is true or which
religions are false.religions are false.

3. • Inclusivism:Inclusivism: Claims that one religion isClaims that one religion is
explicitly true, and all others areexplicitly true, and all others are
implicitly true.implicitly true.
• Exclusivism:Exclusivism: The belief that only oneThe belief that only one
religion is true, and all others opposedreligion is true, and all others opposed
to it are false.to it are false.

5. A Statement of theA Statement of the
Argument for PluralismArgument for Pluralism
John Hicks states:John Hicks states:
““I have not found that the people of the other worldI have not found that the people of the other world
religions are, in general, on a different moral andreligions are, in general, on a different moral and
spiritual level from Christians . . . the basic ideal ofspiritual level from Christians . . . the basic ideal of
love and concern for others and of treating them aslove and concern for others and of treating them as
you would wish them to treat you is, in fact, taughtyou would wish them to treat you is, in fact, taught
by all the great religious traditions.”by all the great religious traditions.”

6. 1.1. It is debatable whether “the fruit of the Spirit” can beIt is debatable whether “the fruit of the Spirit” can be
found in non-Christian religions.found in non-Christian religions.
2.2. Moral equivalency of practice (even if shown) doesMoral equivalency of practice (even if shown) does
not prove that Christianity has no moral superioritynot prove that Christianity has no moral superiority
over other religions.over other religions.
3.3. Hick’s argument begs the question by only assumingHick’s argument begs the question by only assuming
that the moral common denominator of all religions isthat the moral common denominator of all religions is
the standard by which to judge equality.the standard by which to judge equality.
4.4. Moral manifestation does not settle the truth question.Moral manifestation does not settle the truth question.
5.5. The moral superiority of Christianity does not rest onThe moral superiority of Christianity does not rest on
our imperfection, but on Christ’s unique perfection.our imperfection, but on Christ’s unique perfection.

8. Redemptive Equality ArgumentRedemptive Equality Argument
• Hicks argues that the belief that ChristianHicks argues that the belief that Christian
salvation is superior to “salvation” throughsalvation is superior to “salvation” through
other religions is not proven in practice.other religions is not proven in practice.
He argues that if salvation is moving fromHe argues that if salvation is moving from
self-centeredness to a new orientationself-centeredness to a new orientation
centered on God, then all world religionscentered on God, then all world religions
can achieve this end equally as well ascan achieve this end equally as well as
Christianity by reorienting humanity to theChristianity by reorienting humanity to the
Ultimate.Ultimate.

9. Response to RedemptiveResponse to Redemptive
Equality ArgumentEquality Argument
1.1. It’s based on the assumption that allIt’s based on the assumption that all
religions have a proper relation to what isreligions have a proper relation to what is
truly Ultimate.truly Ultimate.
2.2. Wrongly assumes that all religions areWrongly assumes that all religions are
merely a human response to themerely a human response to the
Ultimate.Ultimate.
3.3. It is a denial of truth of any particularIt is a denial of truth of any particular
religion, which is itself a form ofreligion, which is itself a form of
exclusivism, and thus self-contradictory.exclusivism, and thus self-contradictory.

10. Response to RedemptiveResponse to Redemptive
Equality ArgumentEquality Argument
4.4. The pluralist view often degenerates toThe pluralist view often degenerates to
the position that whatever is sincerelythe position that whatever is sincerely
believed is true.believed is true.
5.5. The argument for redemptive equalityThe argument for redemptive equality
implies that all truth claims are a matterimplies that all truth claims are a matter
of both/and and not either/or. As such itof both/and and not either/or. As such it
violates the law of noncontradiction (A isviolates the law of noncontradiction (A is
not non-A).not non-A).

12. Statement Against Christ’sStatement Against Christ’s
UniquenessUniqueness
Hicks argues:Hicks argues:
1.1.Jesus did not teach that he was unique.Jesus did not teach that he was unique.
2.2.The idea of two natures (God and man)The idea of two natures (God and man)
in one being is absurd. How could thein one being is absurd. How could the
infinite be housed in the mind of theinfinite be housed in the mind of the
finite?finite?

13. Response to the Argument thatResponse to the Argument that
Christ is not UniqueChrist is not Unique
First, the NT documents are historically reliable,First, the NT documents are historically reliable,
an their history includes eyewitness accounts ofan their history includes eyewitness accounts of
the resurrection of Jesus Christ. This alonethe resurrection of Jesus Christ. This alone
makes Jesus unique among all the so-calledmakes Jesus unique among all the so-called
prophets or founders of other religions.prophets or founders of other religions.
Second, Hicks does not prove that the incarnationSecond, Hicks does not prove that the incarnation
is an illogical contradiction. Further he isis an illogical contradiction. Further he is
misinformed about the view of the two natures ofmisinformed about the view of the two natures of
Christ, choosing to embrace the unorthodoxChrist, choosing to embrace the unorthodox
Monophysite view.Monophysite view.

15. INTOLERANCEINTOLERANCE
A charge made against exclusivism is that it isA charge made against exclusivism is that it is
intolerant and that it engages in bigotry, after all whyintolerant and that it engages in bigotry, after all why
would only one view be true and all the others bewould only one view be true and all the others be
disenfranchised?disenfranchised?
Pluralists who reject the exclusivists view are guilty ofPluralists who reject the exclusivists view are guilty of
the same thing they charge against exclusivists. Theythe same thing they charge against exclusivists. They
are intolerant of anyone who does not share their view.are intolerant of anyone who does not share their view.
Further, the concept of tolerance presupposes aFurther, the concept of tolerance presupposes a
nonpluralist view of truth.nonpluralist view of truth.

17. Narrow-MindednessNarrow-Mindedness
One of the favorite arguments by the pluralists is thatOne of the favorite arguments by the pluralists is that
nonpluralists are narrow-minded. Why should thenonpluralists are narrow-minded. Why should the
nonpluralists have sole possession of truth?nonpluralists have sole possession of truth?
Once again their argument is self-defeating becauseOnce again their argument is self-defeating because
both pluralist and nonpluralists make and equal claimboth pluralist and nonpluralists make and equal claim
to truth and error. Both claim that their view is trueto truth and error. Both claim that their view is true
and that whatever opposes it is false. They engage inand that whatever opposes it is false. They engage in
their own form of exclusivism even as they challengetheir own form of exclusivism even as they challenge
exclusivism.exclusivism.

19. Intellectual ImperialismIntellectual Imperialism
Pluralists claim that exclusivists are totalitarian withPluralists claim that exclusivists are totalitarian with
regard to truth. They claim that truth and meaningregard to truth. They claim that truth and meaning
smack of fascism.smack of fascism.
ResponseResponse::
FirstFirst, this critique is an, this critique is an ad hominemad hominem attack, it is aattack, it is a
fallacy in that it attacks the person rather than thefallacy in that it attacks the person rather than the
position.position.
SecondSecond, it maintains an unjustified presumptions, that, it maintains an unjustified presumptions, that
truth should be democratic.truth should be democratic.
Third,Third, do pluralistsdo pluralists reallyreally believe that all views arebelieve that all views are
equally true? What about fascism or communism?equally true? What about fascism or communism?

21. • There are universally agreed-upon trans-There are universally agreed-upon trans-
religious moral criteria.religious moral criteria.
• All religious phenomena can be explainedAll religious phenomena can be explained
naturalisticallynaturalistically
• The world is “religiously ambiguous”The world is “religiously ambiguous”
• Pluralistic dialogue is the only way to truthPluralistic dialogue is the only way to truth
• Hick’s view is religiously neutralHick’s view is religiously neutral
• A relativistic view of truth is correctA relativistic view of truth is correct

23. ConclusionConclusion
As a challenge to the evangelicalAs a challenge to the evangelical
claim to truth, pluralism isclaim to truth, pluralism is
impotent. It is self-defeatingimpotent. It is self-defeating
because it is itself exclusivistic.because it is itself exclusivistic.