Is there one Path to God?

Using a basic principles framework to determine Truth

"I can see that in the midst of death life persists; in the midst of untruth, truth persists; in the midst of darkness, light persists. Hence I gather that God is life, truth, and light. He is love. He is the supreme God." - Gandhi

“I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” - Jesus, John 14:6 NIV

---

Capital “T” Truth. Is it real? In a postmodern world of cultural relativism, truth is never capital “T” Truth. All truth is relative, and thus how can any one religion claim to be the absolute Truth? A pluralistic society has been ushered in due to interacting with distinctly different worldviews everyday through social media, mass immigration, and a global economy, and it almost seems disrespectful and arrogant to claim to know Truth that others miss. My ancestors were able to operate in a bubble of Dutch Reformism without ever interacting with a Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, etc. but at twenty years of age I have already known and befriended atheists, agnostics, new age spiritualists, Muslims, and Buddhists. A question has been lingering in my mind ever since I declared my faith to be of the Christian tradition: how can I claim this one truth is absolute Truth?

I used to believe in a social constructionist approach to truth: truth is a human idea informed by cultural context, that all truth is relative, that my truth may not be your truth, religion that claims to be Truth is arrogant, and that capital “T” Truth doesn’t really exist.

However, I have come to see that Truth is real. There are some principles that are always True, certain ways that the universe or God or the Tao or Allah operates. For example, it is True that objects, possessions, ideas, and just about everything in between grow in value when they are shared (a homemade gifted mug from Grandma is infinitely more valuable than a Walmart mug). It is True that violence begets more violence, as if it were a spiritual disease infecting all it touches. It is True that forgiveness heals both parties, and that grudges destroy the soul. There are even physical manifestations of this¹, scientific evidences of spiritual truths. It is True that there is something universal about being human, and thus certain literature and art that gets at this core “human condition” has been able to stay fresh over time: the ancient Hebrew Psalms, Shakespeare, the Bible, the Bhagavad Gita, the Ramayana, Urdu poetry, the Tao Te Ching, and more. Humans of every culture and time period have felt as if these texts apply to their own lives. For me, this is evidence of something universal, something True. There is also something comforting about the existence of Truth to me: it means we aren’t all just floating in a world where there is no sure Truth to grasp onto, and each person is an island who is able to believe and practice whatever they want. There is solid ground beneath our feet due to Truth, ground that allows us to connect with one another and bridge the islands.

But it’s not all sunshine and roses—if Truth is real, that means that certain claims about how the world operates and the character of God are wrong. Raised in a pluralistic society, this makes me uncomfortable, to claim that someone else’s truth is not Truth. What makes me so sure anyway, that at twenty years of age, I have discovered the Truth that many miss? And so the question is held in my mind: in the Christian tradition, Jesus claims to be the only way to God—but what about other paths? Are they pure delusion? Are they entirely valid different paths that get to the same destination, namely the Tao, God, the Sacred Light, the Creator, the Source, the Sustainer, or any of the other many names for the Divine Being which undergirds the universe?

This summer I have been trying to answer these questions, firstly by strengthening my own perception of what Truth is, and secondly by studying other interpretations of Truth through reading sacred texts such as the Tao Te Ching, the Bible, and attempting to understand a Gandhian approach to Hinduism and religion at large. While I subscribe primarily to the teachings of Jesus and of the Christian tradition, I see immense Truth in Taoism and Gandhi’s interpretation of Hinduism. Even my readings of the Bible have surprised me by how heavily it differs at times from the religion of Christianity, at least the forms I am accustomed to. And so, tension is prevalent: if the Christian interpretation of Truth is the One, why do I hear echoes of Truth in other places?²

So here is my first attempt at answering these questions for myself, after some reading, contemplating, and talking to others:

1. Universalism that attempts to reduce the differences between religions by claiming they all get at the same God seems disrespectful to the distinctive rich history and traditions of different religions. Swapping out “Jesus” with “the Buddha” cannot be done with respect to both religions, because while at times their teachings overlap, they also had clear differences that must be looked at in broad daylight.

2. All Truth is of God, no matter the source, because Truth is God. And thus, Truth in one religion and Truth in another are, in fact, getting at a different sides of a similar Divine Being, who is Truth in and of itself. This does not mean, however, that all of what is contained in each religion is Truth. Bits and pieces of Truth can be found in each Earthly religion, philosophy, and spirituality, because the reflection of God can be seen everywhere, the imprint of the Creator.

3. How then, can it be determined which pieces of a religion or philosophy are Truth versus which are lies, or at the least, lower case “t” truths? I believe it is by measuring each doctrine or creed against the universal law of Love: at its most basic, that God is Love and all humankind are brothers and sisters.

4. Furthermore, to determine if an action or thought is “immoral”, I believe in measuring it against what I will term “basic principles:” does the action or thought push towards community, love, justice, and thus Truth? Or does it hide Truth, destroy community, disrespect justice, fail to recognize the Divine in another, and elevate the self above all humanity? If so, it is immoral.

5. Thus, we can agree with the Bible’s teachings or Gandhi’s teachings that, for example, reducing a human person down to a sexual object and using their body in order to gratify a selfish desire is immoral, because it does not honor the fullness of God in another. This reality necessitates a more holistic picture of the individual than a simple body that can be used and discarded. Or to use another example that I articulated more in “Draining the Sea of War,” all violence is immoral, including small forms of othering such as gossip or slander. I believe using the basic principle framework of establishing what is Truth vs. truth and what is moral vs. immoral is far more effective than what the wide-range of religious people tend to do: why is a belief true? why is an action or thought immoral? Because such and such sacred text said so.

6. And, using the frameworks, we can throw out certain religious or philosophical practices as lower case “t” truth or immoral, such as extremist Islamic, Hindu, Christian, or other beliefs about the subjugation of women. Just because a group of people claim religious backing for a practice does not make it inherently worthy of respect and cultural sensitivity; it must be measured against the framework. Genital mutilation on young women is still prevalent in parts of the world, in part due to the fact that “…more than half of girls and women in four out of 14 countries where data are available believe female genital mutilation is a religious requirement,” due to extreme doctrines of Islam, Christianity, or other folk religions³. But this practice, clearly, is in contrast with the basic principles of Love, Justice, and Community that make up capital “T” Truth, as we have established in #4.

7. Speaking in a distinctively Christian lens for a moment, this means that just because a belief or practice is backed by the Bible or by so-called Christian teachings does not inherently make it True. This is the folly of all too many Christians, who take Truth to mean anything within Christianity and anything outside of it as lies. The reality, however, is that not all teachings espoused by human Christians is Truth, and not all religious Christian practices that have evolved from human tradition over time are moral. All Christian practices and doctrines must be looked at within the same basic principles framework that other religious practices and doctrines are looked at in. I would argue that Christian doctrines that excuse violence and war are not Truth, because the basic principles framework requires nonviolence in order to be perfectly loving, just, and communal with all human beings.

8. I believe that the Truth still lies within Christianity, and the Way is Jesus. However, as we established in #7, not all interpretations or actions stemmed from Christian doctrine are Truth. Moreover, the principles of Love, Justice, and Community are principles that can be found within each religion. These principles that I am using for the framework are originally derived from Christianity, which to me best exemplifies them, and must be continually used to examine which interpretations are authentically True. Otherwise, we run the risk of falling into Christianity in a purely cultural sense of the word, where adherents amass great wealth and only interact with people that look just like them, directly contradicting Jesus and the basic principles that can be derived from his teachings.

9. This brings me to a theology of a term my friend Kylie Pierce introduced me to: “Hopeful Universalism,” where Jesus is the Way, and yet we can reasonably hope that all religions get at parts of the Truth and thus its adherents can achieve salvation. In this Hopeful Universalism, humans do not act as the gatekeepers of which religions and philosophies cannot be redeemed or are blatantly false. Hopeful Universalism comes with a certain humility that God is bigger than any human being can perceive, and thus our human certainties of absolute Truth are foolish. The best we can strive for is to get inside of the Truth, where our actions are flowing out of Truth so deeply that others discover Truth simply by looking at the fruit of our lives, not fussing over the particulars of what exactly Truth is on paper.

10. This is the conclusion I have come to of the question “Is there just one Path to God?” Yes. However, it is not for me to gatekeep Truth. Truth is bigger than just the human religion of Christianity, and not all forms of Christianity are Truth. How wide or narrow this Path is is not for me to answer. Additionally, talking to friends of different faiths and spiritualities, I am always moved by their desire for Truth. I have come to feel that what God looks for in human beings is their desire to know Truth, and thus know God, rather than if humans are agreeing with all the right doctrines while leading a dead, fruitless life where their faith has become lukewarm. One might be entirely agreeing with Truth and yet when they come to meet God, God may say “depart from me, I know you not.” It is worth noting in Jesus’ famous parable of the sheep and the goats in which people are separated into two groups, one for eternal punishment and one for eternal life, nothing is said of how many correct Truths are believed:

    “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

    “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

    “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’”

    Jesus separates based not on belief or on Truth recited perfectly, but on how well the humans have gotten inside of the truth and born fruit with their lives by doing justice to the least of these. It is an interesting thought when much of Protestant Christianity emphasizes belief over everything else, with little attention paid to the fruit that is being born from belief. I hesitate to say that justice is the only measure of salvation, as Jesus makes it clear that no humans would be saved then, but it is worth meditating on the parable and pondering its distance from modern Protestant American Christianity. I believe it has possible implications for devout people of faith of other religions who do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with their God, whichever name the Divine may take for them.

    ---

Two final notes:

1. This is a big question, one that I have attempted to answer here at this time in my life. I reserve the right to change my mind about this answer. Moreover, as I pointed out earlier, humility is the best attitude when it comes to matters of absolute Truth. I welcome dialogue about this topic.

2. What I am doing here, in a sense, is looking at Christianity and distilling what its pure form and central principles are using the words of Jesus. Then, shining that light back on the religion of Christianity and the broader scriptures in order to determine where Truth lies within it. After finding Truth in Christianity among the cultural and human error, I am using the same framework to shine a light on other religions and pick the Truth out of there as well. I do find Truth there. So although this is attempting to be a balanced take on other religions and where Truth is, admittedly it still peers at them through the lens of Christianity, albeit a more distilled version. One could argue that the values of Love, Justice, and Community are human values outside Christianity, but for me, I hold the values because of my Christian faith. Is it ever possible to look at religions in a purely objective lens, without using any cultural, social, historical, or religious frameworks? I believe not. So here, I have done my best to be objective while valuing my faith and letting it inform my perspectives without shame.

   

1. https://www.verywellmind.com/the-mental-health-effects-of-holding-a-grudge-5176186#:~:text=Physical%20Health%20Effects&text=Headaches%2C%20insomnia%2C%20upset%20stomachs%2C,to%20change%20or%20difficult%20situations.

2. I have learned an important lesson through attempting to answer these questions: it is always better to answer ultimate questions of reality with others. Carrying existential questions about Truth and Reality alone can be isolating, anxiety-inducing, and urgent feeling. After carrying these questions alone, I started to ask people I respected what their thoughts were—and I always received thought-provoking, intelligent, respectful answers. I felt more at peace about not having all the answers; my searching became less desperate, and more about a healthy curiosity in which I desired to soak up new interpretations of Truth like a sponge.

3. https://www.unfpa.org/resources/female-genital-mutilation-fgm-frequently-asked-questions#why