How does one justify the thought that one religion is the correct one and all others are wrong?

Answer 1

Why All beliefs Cannot be Equal
-------------------------------------




1. The principle of non-contradiction

No one can ever conceive
that one and the same thing can both be and not be.
- Aristotle



At first glance, it may seem arrogant and intolerant to claim that Catholicism is the one true faith, and therefore better than its rivals and its imitators. Such an objection draws its plausibility from a false ideal of equality prevalent in contemporary society. Fortunately, there is a logical and straightforward way to demonstrate that religions cannot be equal: for it can be shown that they contradict one another on many points. For example, if Islam denies the Trinity and Christianity affirms the Trinity, they cannot both be right. If Hinduism and Buddhism maintain that we are repeatedly reborn and live successive lives on earth, but Christianity teaches that we live only once, at least one of the beliefs must be false. Protestantism holds that the Bible is the sole source of divine Revelation and requires no magisterial interpretation, but only private or personal interpretation. Catholicism, on the other hand, holds that divine truth is revealed both by Scripture and by sacred Tradition, and that the Magisterium (from the Latin magister [teacher], i.e., the teaching authority of the Pope together with the bishops in union with him, guided and protected by the Holy Spirit) is the authentic interpreter of divine Revelation. The Catholic view of Biblical Revelation contradicts the Protestant view, so at least one must be wrong. The inequality of religions comes from the fact that with pairs of such contraries, both cannot be right. If a religion is objectively right on a given point, it is superior on that point. If both views are wrong, a third view asserting the truth is superior.

This fundamental inequality of beliefs is based on a first principle of reality and thought called the principle of non-contradiction: nothing can both be and not be under the same aspect at the same time. Because of the principle of non-contradiction, it is simply impossible for all beliefs to be right, and therefore equal at the same time. It is, of course, axiomatic that truth is superior to falsehood.

Some, however, have denied the principle of non-contradiction in theory. They maintain that it is "narrow" to state something is false because it contradicts something else known to be true. They say that reality and thought are richer if we embrace "opposites"- that is contraries - as equally true. Such a thing, however, is not possible. Such impossibility is apparent in the very nature of the notions that contradict one another. With contradictory notions, exactly one must be true and one must be false. When we assert as truth that "there is a Trinity," we are necessarily asserting that the contrary "there is not a Trinity" is false.

In paradoxes opposites can be asserted, however, in a manner that does not violate the principle of non-contradiction. It is precisely these non-contradictory opposites that give us richness in reality and thought. It does not involve the direct opposition of being to non-being for a given thing at a given time. For example, let us consider the concept of the fully mature and realized man, who is both tough and docile. He shows toughness in that he is immovable in defending absolute principles, but is docile in that he is totally receptive to accepting a truth that he does not already know. He is tough and docile under different aspects, so that even though he embraces opposites, there is no contradiction. Reality readily encompasses innumerable such divergences.

Let us return to the principle of non-contradiction. Even those who deny it in theory appeal to it in practice. To advance any argument- whether true or false - the principle of non-contradiction must be used. To provide information in a given thesis, statements must be made in that thesis that exclude those which contradict them. The ideal of complete tolerance, where all beliefs are equally accepted, is impossible in practice. Even extreme liberalism, which attempts to preach such tolerance, is rabidly intolerant toward those systems which do not agree with their liberalism. Christianity is the prime example. It is precisely Christianity’s claims of exclusive truth that caused Christians to be persecuted during the Roman Empire, an empire that prided itself upon being "tolerant" and "open to all beliefs." The effect of the underlying principle of non-contradiction working in the minds of the Roman officials was to outlaw Christianity on the basis that it did not accept the Empire’s multitudinous gods.

Catholicism, then, is not narrow, but infinitely broad. It is capable of incorporating all that is true, good, and beautiful. The very term "catholic" means "universal." Catholicism is the only religion that is capable of this incorporation. The Catholic Church accepts all that is true about other religions and other systems. Any perception of narrowness arises because Catholicism must of necessity reject what contradicts truth, goodness, and beauty. Following upon the principle of non-contradiction, it must reject the not-true, the not-good, and the not-beautiful-that is, the false, the evil, and the ugly. This is precisely where the Church’s condemnations and "thou-shalt-nots" are directed.


Jim McCrea











---

Answer 2

Because "belief" is a strong thing, it must be the only truth without any alternative. Could one tolerate the idea of believing in the wrong religion? But since there are so many of them, somebody must really be mistakening themselves theoretically. To my idea, religions are all human creations, we have minds that always want to know further about who we are. Depending on our questioning capacity, reliogion or philosophy may be the answers. But the second need which is probably the most crucial one is that we must have an alternative of this cruel and mortal life, to struggle against the fact of death we need sth to believe in. And religions offer this. They are good for this purpose but none of them is actually correct..

Answer 3

there are a number of stuff, eg, that the Catholic Church says are immoral that are additionally immoral by potential of judgment of right and incorrect standards on my own. the situation you communicate with is, i think of, that some take basically on faith what they'd in simple terms as easily address reason. and that's the region of the Catholic Church. you have self assurance in God yet you need to not overlook that God's life could be common by potential of reason. you are able to oppose homicide as a sin yet reason additionally forbids homicide. yet you violate your individual theory once you assert :somebody's god says some thing is immoral would not recommend human beings outdoors of that faith would desire to obey it, good? right here you're patently incorrect because of the fact all issues against morality are incorrect no count if a faith says it or not. Homosexuality has been proscribed in many places and situations without regard for faith. And the undeniable fact that many religions proscribe it is going to argue for it not being a non secular regulation solely. do not you notice.

Answer 4

I think that religions are open to each person, maybe the religion that is 'right' for e isnt for you. whoever, i can say that the LDS Church is the true church on the earth, because it holds the keys to the priestood. heavenly father and jesus christ set up the 'catholic' church when Jesus came to earth. However- the church fell into aposticy (meaning it went bad) during the dark ages, thus there became splinter churches (like the one Martin Luther started) because people knew that isnt what Jesus would want. However, jesus never gave them authority to start a new church. Every christian church except the Mormon church is a splinter of the origional catholic church. So off that common knowledge, either the catholic church is true, or the mormon chuch. More info at this site. remember- i said TRUE church, and not RIGHT church

Answer 5

You don't have to justify it - God does a great job of that in His word, the Bible. By the way, it isn't necessarily a religion but a relationship - big difference. God created us for fellowship with Him - He loves you and created you for His purpose, but He is waiting for you to come to Him. Why don't you do that?

Answer 6

I wonder the same thing. I think it is because of ignorance, but that's my complaint for everything!

Answer 7

by searching the truth and comparing and proofs

Answer 8

I don't know. I would not want everyone to be the same...

Answer 9

if you know Yeshua as saviour you wont to share him with others