Do all paths lead to God? Why is Jesus the only way?
During his recent visit to Singapore, Pope Francis declared that all religions are paths to God, likening religions to different languages used to seek God. In response to this statement, I want to assert that Christians should not espouse this view. Let me clarify from the outset that this post is not intended as a personal attack on the Pope but rather as a call to address what I believe to be false doctrine. Such statements carry significant implications, and it is important to address their potential repercussions.
First, we know that Jesus is the only path to God, as in John 14:6, where Jesus said “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” Secondly, there are spiritual repercussions to paganism. Specifically, in 1 Corinthians 10:20, Paul said “No, but the sacrifices of pagans are offered to demons, not to God, and I do not want you to be participants with demons.” Thirdly, whatever the Pope said can be taken as a license for worshippers of other religions to feel even more justified in their spirit-worshipping and be even more closed off towards hearing the gospel. In this regard, it may make things even more difficult for Christians to justify why we are evangelizing to our friends, since “all paths lead to God” anyway. I can easily imagine the convo going something like:
“Have you heard about our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ?”
“Do I need to?”
“Of course! Christ died for our sins and He’s the only path to salvation”
“But I thought the pope said all religions lead to God? It’s just different languages to know God”
In any case, I just wanted to use what the Pope recently said as a segue into one of the toughest questions that Christians may face when evangelizing, namely the topic of why Jesus is the only way to salvation and why can’t there be other truths. The notion that Jesus is the ONLY TRUTH rubs many the wrong way, especially those who see faith as a personal preference sort of thing. Hence, such individuals may take offence at your evangelistic efforts, perceiving you as a bigot who’s trying to shove your personal preference down their throat. For instance, if you want to get to ECF from your home, you may choose to drive there, use public transport, or even walk the entire journey there. But if someone insists that the only absolutely correct way to get to ECF is to walk the entire journey there, wouldn’t you find it absurd as well?
However, unlike the choices to get to ECF which are quite arbitrary, I would argue that if there is indeed an afterlife, salvation is an issue that carries grave (pun intended) consequences. Considering Christianity’s claim that Jesus is the only way to salvation, it is therefore of utmost importance to seriously investigate and consider the veracity (how true this is) of this claim. Because as Lewis Caroll said, “Christianity if false, is of no importance, but if true is of infinite importance.” Presuming that there really is a Creator, and humans do possess an eternal soul and heaven and hell exist for that matter, then it is only normal that Christians having seen the truth for themselves would want to tell others about it, even more so to those that are considered as their beloved. Much like how if a friend is headed down a wrong path that leads to destruction, a loving friend will certainly try his/her utmost best to pull his/her friend to the right path. Hence, I would try to explain this perspective to people when evangelizing to them, to facilitate the understanding that it is really coming from a place of love rather than bigotry or whatsoever reasons that they can think of.
Importantly, the reason why one ought to accept Christ in a monotheistic way (the belief that there is only one God), relates to this fact that one of Christianity’s most vital truths is that all have sinned, and no amount of good works can grant us salvation from sins. Hence, the truth of Christianity is incompatible with the notion of “all religions are just half-truths that promote human goodness”. Put another way, the Christian faith isn’t a religion, but a relationship, insomuch that salvation hinges not on our own works. Rather, we are only justified by our relationship with Jesus Christ who paid for our sins.
A person may then ask, “why can’t I pay for my sins then?” Well for starters, certain sins just can’t be paid by our own efforts. Perhaps in the case of me injuring someone, I could still make up to him/her in some ways by maybe paying for his/her medical bills. However, what about those transgressions that are irreversible (e.g. spreading gossip that destroyed someone’s marriage, un-aliving someone in a car accident)? And it doesn’t even have to be these “major sins” for lack of a better term, that we can’t make atonements for. It could even be something ostensibly small like accidentally making a snide comment about a classmate resulting in the classmate’s low self-esteem, and we don’t ever learn about this and can’t actually make reparations. But most crucially, how do we atone for the transgressions that were sinned against God? And that is exactly why we need Jesus, to atone for our sins against God which we can’t pay for ourselves. That forgiveness from God is POSSIBLE ONLY through a relationship with Jesus is the tenet of Christianity, and this is why Christianity is incompatible with a polytheistic religious perspective.
Since we are saved by a relationship with Christ, one may then wonder what a relationship with Christ means. Simply put, a relationship with Christ means to place our trust and have faith in Him, striving to live in ways that please Him. Those who misunderstand the gospel tend to overlook this important truth, thus misperceiving grace as cheap. E.g. “Since Christ already paid for our sin-debts, might as well go on a sin-buffet”. I would say that this viewpoint is flawed and self-deceitful because that can’t really be considered as having a relationship with Christ at all. Imagine having a friend who paid for your debt; instead of doing what your friend likes, you repeatedly do what he/she dislikes and go on to rack up even more debts on purpose. Suppose beyond all these, the one most basic expectation that your friend has for you is to trust and believe only in him/her instead of people that he/she deems to be bad for you, but you go on to violate this most basic expectation anyway. In which case, can you still really claim that you have a meaningful relationship with your friend? Or is it more likely that you are just taking advantage and exploiting your friend, seeing him/her as an ATM of sorts instead of feeling grateful and indebted?
Precisely because we are saved by a relationship with Christ and not by works, it all the more explains why not all paths leads to God, and the truth that Christianity espouses (only one path to God) is not necessarily irrational as much as it may sound authoritative and oppressive in some ways. If Jesus is indeed the only way, and having paid for our sins He wants us to be fully committed to Him, I would think being loyal to His word is merely a small price to pay compared to whatever He’s done for us. Hence, this is also why Christians who have encountered Jesus, all experience this transformation within us. That is to say, our hearts desire to want to do good and change for the better according to His standard because we understand how much Christ loves us to choose to die to die for us in order to repay for our sins.
Since I started with the Pope, I thought I should end with the Pope. I have also heard arguments in his defence that “all paths lead to God” is not entirely wrong, because even when we are in the gutter, it is still possible for people to turn around and come back to Christ. On the surface, this feels like a non-falsifiable statement and thus is a good defence for what the Pope has said. But if we just think about it more deeply, we will realize how absurd this defence sounds. Consider that right now, I tell you that my aim is to win my girlfriend’s trust. And instead of taking pragmatic steps like being faithful, I went to a sleazy bar and blew my entire life savings there. And when confronted, I just replied that “all paths lead to winning my girlfriend’s trust”. Let that sink in.
I cannot claim to know the Pope well enough to accurately deduce his intention, but I can only hypothesize based on the grandiosity of the event (it was an inter-religious), he probably did it out of fear of being cancelled, and the pressure to be politically correct. But may I remind each of us, brothers and sisters, that Christ died for us publicly, so we should not fear speaking His truth publicly as well. After all, to be persecuted for His namesake is something that Jesus already warned us in Matthew 10:22, and 1 Peter 4:14 tells us that we should not be afraid to be persecuted for proclaiming God’s truth.