Objection · Case 05 · Relativism

Hick anticipated this objection and replied that pluralism is a second-order hypothesis about religions, not a religion, so it isn’t competing on the same level.

One objection from the free evidence repository at apologetics.pro.

Suggest a correction

Response

Hick’s reply should be on the table. The response, from Plantinga and Gavin D’Costa among others, is that a second-order hypothesis which entails that every first-order tradition is wrong about its central claims is not neutral, whatever level it occupies. To say that the Christian’s personal God and the Buddhist’s cessation are both masks on an unknowable Real is to tell both that they have misdescribed what they most care about. That is a rival claim about the summit, and it has to compete like any other.

About this exhibit

This objection is to The self-referential problem in pluralism.

A further reply is that saying “all paths lead to the same place” is itself a sweeping claim about every religion, one none of them makes about itself. The pluralist is not standing neutrally above…

Under Claim 06: The popular idea that all religions are different paths up the same mountain does not hold, because the traditions describe different and contradictory summits.