Part Seventeen: More examples of questions that challenge advocates of religious pluralism and moral relativism.
This week’s blog article continues last week’s blog with additional examples of Socratic questions that challenge the two fundamental doctrines of postmodernism: religious pluralism (all religions are equal and legitimate) and moral relativism (there are no moral absolutes that apply to all people and cultures). The purpose of these questions is to stimulate conversations that lead to opportunities for Christians to explain why religious pluralism and moral relativism are harmful to society and stifles religious freedom. The introduction to this issue can be read in last week’s blog article.
4. “I think a woman has a right to have an abortion!”
• “If you were pregnant, what would be inside you—a human being or something else?”
• “If your mother wanted an abortion, and you were the unborn child, would you want her to abort you or spare your life?”
• “Why do you think an unborn child is not a human being when science demonstrates that life begins at conception?”
• “If the fetus is a human being, why shouldn’t the unborn child be entitled to all the rights and protection of any other human being.”
• “Why should it be permissible to take the life of another human being just because someone wants to?”
• “How can an unborn baby be merely tissue in the case of an abortion and then become a person in a lawsuit, such as when a mother is prosecuted for taking drugs that harm her fetus, or when the unborn child is receiving an inheritance?”
5. “All religions are equal; they are just different paths to the same God!”
• “How can all religions be equal when most of them claim to be superior to all other religions?”
• “How can all religions be paths to the same God when they have different views on the nature of God, the way to achieve salvation, and virtually every other major doctrine? Doesn’t that violate the laws of logic?”
6. “You Christians are so intolerant; you think everyone’s beliefs are wrong but yours!”
• “If you are tolerant, why do you condemn me for having my beliefs?”
• “You think I’m intolerant because I believe my view is right, but you obviously think your view is right. Doesn’t that make you intolerant? Isn’t that a double standard?”
7. “It doesn’t matter what I believe as long as it meets my spiritual needs!”
• “What if you’re wrong? What if your religious belief leads away from God? Why are you willing to take that risk without at least checking out Christianity, which is the only religion in the world with objective evidences to demonstrate its truth-claims?”
• “What if Jesus really is the only way to God, as the Bible says? Can you explain to me why you are unwilling to check-out Christianity?”
• “What do you mean by ‘spiritual needs’?”
(If the answer is something like, “I feel at peace,” or ‘I experience spiritual fulfillment,” or “my heart tells me my beliefs are true,” ask the follow-up question: “How does feeling that something is true make it true? Can’t someone sincerely believe their emotions are reflecting truth—but still be sincerely mistaken?”)
Note: Christians also experience peace and spiritual fulfillment. However, our faith is confirmed by the fact-based truths and reliability of the Bible. Thus, Christians can test their feelings and religious experiences with Scriptures to see if they are genuine or a product of their own emotions. If our subjective feelings are not in harmony with God’s Word, they are not from God.
8. “There are no absolute truths!”
“ Are you absolutely certain it’s true that there are no absolute truths?”
“If there are no absolute truths, why should I believe your statement, ‘there are no absolute truths’”?
9. “Even if truth exists, we can’t discover it!”
• “ Why should I believe that statement if truth doesn’t exist or can’t be discovered?”
• “Is that a true statement, or are you guessing?”
10. “A college professor tells his class, ‘there are no absolute truths!’”
“Do you believe what you teach is true?”
“Do you give true and false tests?”
“Does that mean I can give an answer that is wrong to you, but it can still be correct if I think it’s true?” ©
In next week’s blog article, and the following week, I’ll share what I consider to be the two governing foundational for all principles evidential apologetics, whether applying the offensive approach (which this series represents) or traditional “defensive” apologetics.
This series of blog articles is adapted from my book The Christian Combat Manual: Helps for Defending Your Faith; A Handbook for Practical Apologetics, which can be purchased at most outlets. The Combat Manual gives the Christian position on this issue and evidence to support it.