#STRask - Does Open-Mindedness Require Studying Other Religions Before Becoming a Christian?

Episode Date: February 9, 2026

Questions about the claim that if Christians really want to be open-minded, they need to read and study other religions before committing to Christianity, and with so many paths claiming to be the sole path, what is to be said about those who choose incorrectly?   How would you respond to someone who says, “If Christians really want to be open-minded, they need to read and study other religions before committing to Christianity”? With so many paths claiming to be the sole path, what is to be said about those who choose incorrectly?

Hey there, this is Amy and Greg. We're back on hashtag S-tier Ask. And you ready for the first question, Greg? Yes, ma'am. I don't know why I always ask you that. Of course you are. What are you going to say, no? Social amenities, you know. This is kind of radio cycle babble or podcasts, I guess we call it now. Oh, goodness. All right. So this first question comes from World View Cafe. How would you respond to someone who says, if Christians really want to be open-minded? they need to read and study other religions before committing to Christianity. Well, I guess I'd want to have more information from that person to see why he thinks that's the case. Think as a parallel here to the medical field.

So you're sick. And so you go to the doctor, and the doctor makes an assessment and gives you the assessment. Now, sometimes you're going to ask for another opinion that there's nothing wrong with that, but you're not obliged to go to every single doctor in that field to see what they say. If it turns out that the doctor has a good reputation, does an analysis, and gives you a diagnosis and explains all the reasons why the diagnosis is a sound one, you have no reason to doubt. because there's nothing suspicious about any of the process. Why is somebody obliged if they're really going to be open-minded to go to a bunch of other doctors

when this doctor has given what appears to be a completely adequate assessment? Okay. And incidentally, it isn't as if, you know, there are all of these different religions that are very, very similar, and you're trying to figure out which one is the true one, as if all of them have God and all of them have heaven, and how do you please God to get to heaven? Many people who are critics think of it that way. Well, it turns out that's monotheism, and there's three major monotheistic religions, Christianity, Judaism, and they're kind of joined at the hip in some ways, and then there's Islam.

And you have a couple of other much smaller monotheistic religion. but for the most part, that's the big three. And then the other religions take Buddhism. Well, that's a big deal, except for it's a non-theistic religion. There's no God there. And there's no heaven there either. The ideal, if I'm understanding this correctly, is that if you're successful in your spiritual life as a Buddhist, then you disappear.

That ends all suffering. Nirvana is extinction. You know, it's extinction of suffering and maybe extinction. of the self. There's no durable self there. In Hinduism, everything is an illusion, Maya, and the only reality is the unity of the divine, and that's an impersonal. So that's monism. Oneism, only one thing is real in that religion. So it isn't like there's all these different credible options that you need to keep in mind, like you're trying to buy a car or or something like that.

And what's the best one? I know what I like. I want to get a truck. And so here are the trucks that are, what are the reviews on them? It's not that kind of thing. You're trying to figure out the nature of reality. And as you are, I'm pausing now because I'm thinking, I guess a lot of people when they embrace the religious project, they aren't trying to figure out reality.

They're trying to do like Mark said. That would be Carl. The founder of atheism, I'm sorry, the founder of communism just in case. And he said that religion is the opiate of the people. He was an atheist. There is no God. So make up or adopt whatever fantasy makes you feel better. That's basically the idea.

And it turns out a lot of people functionally operate that way. What do I like? Oh, I like Buddhism. You like Buddhism? Oh, yeah, I like the fourfold path, or I like this aspect. I like meditation. That's part of Buddhism. I like reincarnation.

You can get another chance if you mess it up this time. What doesn't matter what you like, it matters what's true. And a lot of times when people isolate the things they like out of a religion like that, it turns out there's a whole bunch of other stuff that are part of that religion that they don't even think about that if they were to take it as a whole as a sound, accurate, true story of religion. reality. There's a whole bunch of baggage there they don't want, which shows that most people, when it comes to choosing a religion, are trying to find something that they like. Now, if somebody is saying, you know, if you ought to be checking if you're open-minded all these other religions out, well, I think that's the right kind of question, or at least it comes in the right

place. If you really want to know what's true about reality, then keep an open mind. Fine. Okay, I'm good for that. But if it turns out that the religion that you are embracing seems to cover the bases, I don't know why there's any need to go further. It's interesting, you know, as we talk with, say, Tim Barnett, who wrote a book with Elisa Childers on deconstruction, a lot of Christians who deconstruct and therefore deconvert are leaving a straw man. In other words, they are misunderstanding Christianity to begin with, and therefore they don't like what they read or see or think about or the demands it makes in their life, and so they moved to something that they like. But oftentimes they are rejecting a caricature, not to say there aren't some concerns. A lot of people don't like hypocrisy. Well, hypocrisy has nothing to do with whether Christianity is true or false. It has to do with whether a person who claims to be a Christian is a true Christian or not. That's what it has to do with.

The people get confused about that. But back to the basic. I'm curious what you have to say about this. I just don't see how that's required. Open. I don't know who said this first, but somebody said, you don't want to be so blinded that your brains fall out, you know, kind of thing. There's nothing wrong with taking a position for good reasons,

even if you haven't considered all the other options, or you may not even be aware of all the other options. if there is good reason, for example, to be convinced that Jesus actually rose from the dead, well, that pretty much seals it. Yes. I mean, I don't know if I have that much more to add. What occurred to me, and then you moved into this point, but when you were saying the story about the doctor and you don't have to go to all the different doctors, I think it's actually worse than that

Because the point you were making right after that was that religions are so different. It's not like I'm going to this doctor and this doctor down the street and seeing which what they say is different. It's more like I'm going to go to this doctor and then I'm going to go over to West Africa and talk to a witch doctor and find out what he thinks because I can't do this Western medicine unless I first study these other things. It's that different. Yes, that's a good. That's a much better parallel, I think. Or it's almost like, I just thought of another wrinkle in the illustration, that it's like your eye is hurting and you say, okay, I've gone to an ophthalmologist. He's giving, but I have to go to a podiatrist now, a foot doctor, you know.

It's apples and oranges, really, but that's the way oftentimes it is when it comes to these different religious views. They're very, very different and perceive the world an entirely different way. But you can see from that illustration that if you have learned the reasons why, you use Western medicine and science and in these things to cure people, you don't have to understand all the other ways to do it if you're convinced this is true. That doesn't mean you're not open-minded. I mean, you might be interested. You could find out what they think, but if you believe this is true, then that's what you should do. And I do think, and I hadn't even thought of this, but I do think you're right that this might go back to the idea that

we're not trying to find out what's true. I'm not sure about that. But what happens is, I think when you are, when you learn things as a young person, for example, let's say your parents are teaching you about science and medicine, just little things as you go, and then you never think to question it. That still doesn't mean it's a problem if you accept Western medicine. Right. And I think this is what happens with Christians who are raised in Christianity, and they learn Christianity, and then they discover all these reasons to think is true as they get older and they start thinking about it. That doesn't mean they have to look at these other things. Whereas somebody who maybe is becoming a Christian, they'd be more likely to think about all these different things.

But what happens is as you think about religion and you think about the different aspects of reality, your options narrow. So let's say I think, okay, I think reality exists. I'm convinced of that. Then your options narrow. And I think that they're, I don't know, whatever it is. There's evidence of design, origin of the universe, so some kind of personal God is part of the picture. So that narrows, begins to narrow the options down, right. So you narrow and you narrow and you narrow, before you even look at the religion.

Yeah. You've narrowed it down based on rational. and reason and things people have been reasoning for thousands of years. And at that point, do you have to learn about these other religions that don't fall within what you already think is true? I don't think you have to. You can. But I think that's kind of how people think about this. I wonder if the skeptic who raised this challenge, I presume they're a skeptic, at least skeptical of a Christianity, that you're not within your rights to believe Christianity or least to claim you're open-minded, unless you do all of this other stuff. I wonder if that

person is done the same. I'm a fair question. Is that the way you pursued? Is that how you came to the conclusion? Tell me what you know about Christianity before you rejected it. Right, right, you know, but these sometimes are just kind of, I don't want to be uncharitable here, but sometimes these are defensive responses, you know, you don't want to take Christianity seriously. So you find all of these particular ways of rejecting it, you know. And this is one of them. Well, if you're really open-minded, no, I'm open to, well, if you really are, then you ought to look at all the religions and you can't make a decision until you've exhausted everyone. No, I don't think so. I guess what you could also do is say, look at their life, just think about anything they believe

and then say, did you study this? Did you study that? Like, look at the opposing things and find out because this is just not how we operate. That's not how we run our lives. But there's something else going on here that I don't want people to miss. What if the Christian simply said, so what? No, I'm not open-minded. So what? Okay, well, that's moving towards the objection. That admits that, but it doesn't, it doesn't tell you anything about the legitimacy of Christianity itself. I guess I'm not open-minded. I guess I'm a hypocrite. I guess I am this, that. But that's enough about me. Let's talk about Jesus, because that's the issue. Right. Christianity is not about Christians and anything to do with Christians.

There are motivations, how well read they are, or well-versed they are in different religions, how open-minded they are. It's not about any of that at all. And so many of these challenges we deal with, Amy, really come down to focusing in on the Christian, the believer, and not the belief. And the minute people do that, oh, you're intolerant, oh, you're bigoted, blah, blah, blah, on and on, nauseam. All of those things may be true, but that doesn't, for the sake of argument, but that doesn't mean our beliefs about Jesus or the world or God or anything like that are false. And you can't, I read this in a book somewhere, and I can't remember, I can't give credit to it, but it was great. I think it was somebody critiquing Daniel Dennett, the former new atheist, I say former, because he's passed away last year. And he said, you cannot refute an idea by talking about something else. You cannot refute an idea by talking about something else.

Now, Lewis had a very similar thing that in God of the Dock or somewhere I cited recently, but it gets down to these guys all are onto it, but a lot of Christians, and certainly a lot of skeptics are. They can find fault with all kinds of things that are unrelated to the core issue of whether the claims of Christianity are true as a picture of reality, and then take a lot of time going after that. your cultural background, you're a Christian because you're raised in America, or because you're a Christian parents, blah, blah, blah, which all may be true. It's not related. It doesn't speak, rather, to the question of the truth of Christianity, which is what we ought to be discussing.

I mean, just look around us. Some people believe true things for good reasons. Some people believe true things for no reasons or shaky reasons. That doesn't mean it's no longer true. Right. And maybe what you could just do is say, you know what, you're right. You and I, let's study all the religions together. Let's do that. I'm all for that. Let's do it. Let's, we'll start with whatever you want and then we'll move to Christianity. And we'll do that together. It's like if you do it alphabetical, you get to Christianity pretty quickly because it's C. Well, so it'll be Buddhism. Oh, no. There's also like animism.

Oh, yeah. Buddhism. Right. Christianity. Okay. Let's go to a question from Mike. How would you respond to someone who says, with so many paths claiming to be the sole path, what is to be said about those who choose incorrectly? Well, this is a very easy question to answer, but it's an analytical statement. Here's what is to be said about those who choose. incorrectly. They're wrong. Sometimes being wrong matters, and sometimes it doesn't matter. But in this particular case, depending on which religion is true, it could really matter. If it turns out, for example, that atheism is true as a worldview, it doesn't matter. There are no consequences

whatsoever to having a wrong view about reality there. It seems to me you could believe all these religious things and follow all this stuff and be all hopeful or whatever and maybe enjoy the benefits of being part of that religious community, but when you die, you're done. It's over with. But if it turns out that certain religions are true, okay, let me back up a little. If any reincarnation religion is true, we get another shot. So the consequences are not as severe. But if any of the monotheistic religions are true, then this is it. This life is it. And then there's judgment and there's reward or punishment.

I mean, that's true of all three of the monotheistic religions, even the smaller ones, not just the great ones, as I recall. But, okay, well, then the consequence is serious. So if a person has the wrong views, then they're mistaken. I mean, that's pretty straightforward. That's like saying, bachelor's, yeah, they're not. not married. Okay. But the key is, what is the consequence? And it depends on what actually is true. The consequence may be nil for getting these questions wrong, depending on what's actually true. Or they may, if Christianity is true, everything is weighed in the balance there. Everything matters.

Lewis, again, here, said, if Christianity is not true, it's completely inconsequential. If it is true, it's the most important thing of the world. My paraphrase of him, that's the point he was making. I think I would also want to ask the person a little bit more to find out exactly what their concern is. Is there a concern what happens to them? Is there a concern? Is this fair? I'm not sure what exactly it is.

The question behind the question. Yeah, the question behind the question. But I would say going back to the medical analogy, because I'm going. Because I think it's very helpful to use this analogy because it takes it out of the ice cream preferences area and into the insulin, you know, reality area of life. Objective truth, yeah. So look at, let's say there, you have four doctors and you have some serious disease and they have completely different ideas about how to cure you. What if you choose the wrong one, then you're not cured? That's what happens.

is that unfair? Well, I mean, I don't know. I don't know what that would mean. That doesn't even seem to apply. So it's just that's just the nature of reality. And we see this all the time. But for some reason, when it comes to religion, people think it's a completely different category. And they start thinking about it in a completely different way as if it's preferences.

but I don't even think they're consciously thinking that as they make these arguments. I think it's in the back of their mind. So if you can bring that out and help them to see, I think you might be viewing religion this way. Is that true? Do you think there's an actual truth about spiritual reality? Is there a spiritual reality? Just like there's a physical reality around us here that we either come into contact with or we don't, We are for or we are against or whatever it is.

And if you can help them to think through that, I don't think people have even thought carefully enough to think that they're relativists when it comes to religion. Well, if they fall into this conversation about, well, I think that God is going to be fair and as long as they're trying the best that God's going to honor that. Well, notice when they, and this is kind of a common pushback in Christianity, it's too narrow. God is, like the bumper sticker, God is too big to fit into one religion. I just wrote about that. I think it's in the solid ground coming up.

And the irony is a person who makes those kinds of statements have already committed themselves to a view of God that's parochial. That's very specific. They're thinking of God as God as an individual who makes judgments and he's okay with all this other stuff. So two things follow from that. First of all, you've already narrowed it down. you've excluded a whole bunch of options that are non-theistic or at least non-theistic in the way we think of it. You know, there may be monistic like Hinduism or forms of Hinduism or non-theistic at all like Buddhism or ancestor worship that, you know, doesn't take all of those details into consideration. So you've already, you've already narrowed the field, but you're also making theological presumptions about the nature of God himself.

And your decisions about how the whole salvation thing works is based on these theological presumptions that you're making. It's ironic, though, the person who raises these kinds of things probably thinks they're being neutral, you know, when in fact they're making all kinds of claims about God and the nature of reality and whatever to level this kind of unfairness challenge to Christianity. But how do they know? How do they know that? That's the question. It turns out a lot of people haven't really thought carefully about religion in a long time. There have been certain times in history when people have been much more careful thinking about religion, and it has not been in the last 50 years, sadly. Alan Gohm said, you know, 200 years ago, the heretics were better thinkers. So sinus, for example, maybe that's more than 200.

But the point is, in the past, the heretics were better thinkers than many people nowadays, even people who believe Orthodox things, Alan Combs, one of his contributions to my life. Well, to be fair, I think most topics, people don't earn great thinkers right now, sadly. So we do what we can, Greg. Well, thank you, World View Cafe and Mike. We really appreciate hearing from you. Send us your question. to X and just use the hashtag

STR Ask. Or if you go to our website at STR.org, all you have to do is look for our hashtag STRSk podcast page, and you can send us your question there. Well, thank you so much for listening. This is Amy Hall and Greg Kokel for Stand to Reason.