We live in an increasingly connected and culturally diverse society. In his book, “Encountering Religious Pluralism,” (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2005), Harold Netland, in the first half, describes the pluralistic context in which we live today and, in the second half, proposes a biblically orthodox and culturally sensitive response to today’s challenge.

Netland begins by painting an accurate picture of the pluralistic context in the West, characterized not merely by changing demographics and diversity of worldviews or religious beliefs, but in the changing perspective to religious belief systems. He observes that religious pluralism grew out of “the combined impact of two deeply rooted trends in the modern world: first, widespread loss of confidence in the claims of traditional Christianity, brought about in part by the effects of modernization and the enduring legacy of religious skepticism; and second, the heightened awareness of cultural and religious diversity worldwide induced by the Western ‘discovery’ of the New World and globalization” (p.16). By tracing the emergence of pluralism to modernization and industrialization of the seventeenth century, leading up to globalization of the twentieth century, Netland demonstrates that religious diversity in itself is not new. Distinguishing the terms “diversity” and “pluralism”, Netland finds nothing problematic about acknowledging the undeniable fact of religious diversity, but is concerned about the pluralistic ethos, that is “an egalitarian and democratized perspective holding that there is a rough parity among religions concerning truth and stereological (salvational) effectiveness” (p.12). In other words, pluralism rejects any one religion or tradition to be “universally valid and normative for all peoples in all cultures” (p. 156). This, in Netland’s view, is not new and has implications on Christian faith and missions. It erodes confidence of many, including believers, in the truth of the Christian faith and also raises questions about the necessity for missions. While Christians traditionally have been exclusivists or particularists who maintained that “salvation stems solely from the person and atoning work of Jesus Christ” (p.49), there have been shifts towards inclusivism and more recently towards pluralism, that holds that Christians can claim Jesus as Savior for themselves, but not for all peoples. John Hicks, once an orthodox Christian and now an influential apologist for religious pluralism is representative of such a transition in the West. Since contemporary religious pluralism “rejects traditional Christianity as untenable but is open to new religious alternatives” (p. 129), it raises a fresh challenge: “Why Christianity over other religious traditions?”

Netland, in responding to religious pluralism, argues that diversity in appearance or behavior is rooted in fundamental differences in religious worldviews, which in turn are embedded in sharply contrasting understanding of the nature of reality, in particular “nature of religious ultimate, nature of human predicament and nature of salvation” (p. 182). Thus monotheistic religions such as Christianity, Islam and Judaism ascribe to one Creator God, whereas Hinduism is pantheistic, and Buddhism (at least Theravada) does not acknowledge God. Similarly, Christians believe in repentance and receiving Christ for salvation, whereas Hindus and Buddhists insist that it is a result of one’s individual efforts. Netland thwarts the common assumption that all religions essentially teach the same things and concludes that given the conflicting beliefs, all religions cannot be true at the same time. The criteria for evaluating the truthfulness of the claims of the various religions would be the relation between what they assert and the way reality actually is. A thoughtful Christian response to religious pluralism would then be to demonstrate that Christianity offers the “best explanation” for the nature of reality, as in the words of Abu Qurrah: “Christianity presents the most plausible idea of God, it exhibit’s the fullest understanding of man’s actual religious needs and prescribes what appear to the most appropriate remedies.” Furthermore, Netland proposes a context-independent criterion for evaluating alternative worldviews, in particular “moral awareness”. The moral criterion would demonstrate that moral values and principles are objective across ethnic, cultural and religious boundaries and that Christian theism - that the world was created by a God who himself is inherently moral - provides the “most reasonable explanation”. Such an apologetic within interreligious contexts requires deep commitment to Christian faith but also respect and tolerance for people of all faith as fellow beings created in God’s image, argues Netland; “a commitment to both truth and justice - a gracious and firm insistence upon Jesus Christ as the one Lord for all and a concern for justice that protects the rights of religious others” (p. 347).

This book is both informative and insightful. It got me thinking on two points that are closely related: Firstly, in a context where tolerance is regarded as the highest of virtue, the exclusive (“particularistic” is a better term) claims of Christianity are considered intellectually untenable and morally unacceptable, while on the other hand, religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism are a model of tolerance. Secondly, “contemporary religious skepticism is also quite selective, so that it rejects traditional orthodoxies as untenable but allows for extraordinary credulity towards new religious practices” (p.129). It brings to light a fresh challenge to Christian witness and missions – How do we demonstrate that Christianity presents the whole truth, when compared to other faiths? How do we share the particularistic truth claims without being offensive? Netland’s recommendation of the “nature of reality” argument and his advice to engage in such an apologetic with tact and love, are quite helpful. One of the strengths of this book is that it weaves together the present context with the legacy of the past, in particular about religious skepticism towards Christianity arising out of modernization, thus presenting a complete picture of the situation at hand. Furthermore, in referencing the past, he also draws valuable lessons from history that can be applied today, such as Abu Qurrah’s argument that Christianity makes sense of reality in a way that other religious traditions do not, and Mongke Khan’s rebuke of William for ridiculing, in his debate with a Buddhist, their beliefs and practices. This book is an excellent resource for every thoughtful missionary and apologist engaged in defending and demonstrating the uniqueness of Christ in a spirit of love and tolerance towards people of other faith.