The topic of liberal humanism has brought various attacks towards the “exclusivity” of
the religion of Christianity. Exclusivism within a religion is defined as “the only way to get in a
proper relationship with God (the only way to salvation).” Alvin Plantinga, A Defense of
Religious Exclusivism. Exclusivity within Christianity is defined with the Scripture in John 14:6,
which states “I am the way the truth, and the light; No one comes to the Father but through me.”
This quote from Scripture is taken from Jesus’s words, stating that He is the one to follow in
order to reach God. That is the exclusivity of Christianity, we must follow Jesus in order to reach
God.
The first argument against liberal humanisms claim that Christianity is exclusionary is
that “equal rights imply equal plausibility.” Professor’s Corner, Islam and Christianity and its
Claim to Exclusivism, Liberty University. This argument basically means that everyone’s
opinion is equal to each other, “even if they may conflict.” Id. Since everyone is entitled to their
own freedom, all opinions are equal even if they differ in every aspect. This argument helps to
also prove that “ethical objectivism is false.” Id. The second argument against liberal humanisms
claim against Christianity being exclusionary is that “moral objectivity supports intolerance.” Id.
This argument states that if you use moral objectivity to support an argument, then you are
“arrogant,” if you “claim something to be true” through moral objectivity. Id. The same goes for
the other way around, that if you use moral objectivity to disprove an argument then you are
being arrogant. If you use “political correctness”, or science, to prove an argument, then you are
not being arrogant since you are using solid facts that cannot be argued with. But, as stated
before, “moral objectivity supports intolerance.” Id. Although, “tolerance can only be valuable if
people’s opinions are equally plausible.” Id. So, if “ethical objectivism is true then tolerance
cannot be true.” Id. The third and final argument against liberal humanisms claim against
Christianity being exclusionary is “moral objectivity supports exclusive claims to truth.” Id. This
argument states that “if there are objective moral standards then it makes exclusive claims to the
truth acceptable because it is morally arrogant.” Id. This means that if you use moral objectivity
to support an argument that deals with moral values then it is acceptable. Liberal humanism is
combined with certain moral values, so using liberal humanism to argue the exclusionary of
Christianity is acceptable because we are using moral objectives to argue moral objectives.
Within today’s world, there are many communities around the world that have
experienced terrorism first hand. All surrounding communities have felt the affects of terrorism.
As Christians, we have been taught our whole life to “forgive our enemies and turn the other
cheek.” Steve Monsma, Healing for a Broken World, 196 (2008). We have also been warned by
God within Matthew 24:6 that there would be “wars and rumors of war until His coming again in
power.” When it feels as if there is no help, we are required to remember that “we are called to
work as Gods peacemakers.” Id. 197. We must come together in solidarity to unite and bring
peace to Gods creation. We must also recall to our minds the four (4) perspectives rooted within
Gods word. The first perspective is “our country and its government are themselves far from
perfect and prone to make errors and to act from improper motives.” Id. 198. This perspective
teaches us that just as other countries will make errors, ours will to, but we must still stand
together to show our unity. The second perspective from Gods word is “basic human rights must
be protected even as we struggle against terrorists who would destroy us.” Id. 199. This
perspective teaches us that even though we may be defeated, we are still human are subject to the
human rights God has given us. The third perspective from Gods word is the “just-war theory.”
Id. 200. This theory is based on two (2) foundations, one (1) being “governments are instituted
by God for a special role in human society.” Id. 201. The second foundation is “governments
may not rush off to war quickly and easily.” Id. 201. The fourth and final perspective is
“forgiveness.” Id. 201. We can be taught by this perspective that “one thing that is due the
terrorists who have sworn to destroy is forgiveness.” Id. 202. Even though this is challenging,
when so many of our civilians have been taken by terrorism, we must remember what God has
preached to us throughout our lives within the Bible.
References
Alvin Plantinga, A Defense of Religious Exclusivism,
https://hettingern.people.cofc.edu/Intro_to_Philosophy_Sp_06/Plantinga_Religious_Exclusivism
.htm
John 14:6
Professor’s Corner, Islam and Christianity and its Claim to Exclusivism, Liberty University,
https://canvas.liberty.edu/courses/594061/pages/watch-professors-corner-islam-and-christianity-
and-its-claims-of-exclusivism?module_item_id=61918525
Steve Monsma, Healing for a Broken World, 2008,
https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/liberty/reader.action?docID=346004&ppg=196
Matthew 24:6
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
