Claim 7 of 8 · Case 05 · Relativism
Because the world’s religions make contradictory claims, they cannot all be equally true, so “all religions lead to the same God” fails once the terms are defined.
One claim from the free evidence repository at apologetics.pro.
This is our central logical argument here, so it stands on its own. If one system says ultimate reality is personal and another says it is impersonal, or one says you are distinct from God and another says you are God, these are not different angles on one truth. They are claims that rule each other out. Two of them can be false and one true, or all can be false, but they cannot all be true in the same way at the same time. The honest move is not to smooth the differences over but to ask which one matches reality.
Backed by 3 pieces of evidence
The law of non-contradiction, from Aristotle’s “Metaphysics”
This supplies the engine of the whole argument, the reason contradictory claims cannot all be correct, grounded in a standard principle of logic rather than a Christian assumption.
Religious pluralism, the view of John Hick (competing explanation)
State this fairly first, because it is the serious version of “all paths lead to the same place.” In the parable, the blind men’s reports are merely different, not contradictory, and telling the story requires standing back and seeing the whole elephant, which is exactly the total overview the parable says no one has. The pluralist quietly claims the very God’s-eye view being denied to everyone else.
The Advaita “levels of reality” reply (competing explanation)
This is the most sophisticated way to soften the contradiction, so represent it honestly rather than skipping it. Worth asking in reply: are both levels describing the same reality, or does relocating the clash to a higher level just move it rather than resolve it? A fair question, not a knockdown.