Does “strict exclusivism” sound like overkill? After all, exclusivism implies strictness. The point is to emphasize that in attempting to promulgate inclusivism it is exclusivism that ends up at the forefront as it comes across as that which it is; the only logical conclusion.
Consider, for example, that Oprah Winfrey stated, “I am a Christian who believes that there are certainly many more paths to God other than Christianity.”1Part 1: From Inclusivism to ExclusivismPart 2: Conflicts Between Winfrey/Tolle Spirituality and ChristianityPart 3: Conflicts Between Winfrey/Tolle Spirituality and Christianity (concluded)Part 4: Oprah Winfrey Gets and Gives Bad AdvicePart 5: Oprah Winfrey Gets and Gives Bad Advice (concluded)Part 6: Eckhart Tolle-Savior of the Earth and Humanity
From Inclusivism to Exclusivism:
While she may think that she is being tolerant and inclusivistic, and many consider her as being just that, what she is doing is stating, “I am right and if you disagree, you are wrong.” In other words, “I am a Christian who believes that there are certainly many more paths to God other than Christianity and any Christian, throughout the last 2,000 millennia including millions of martyrs, who think otherwise, including Jesus Christ, are wrong.” In her attempts at inclusivism she is excluding the exclusivists thereby making herself an exclusivist and thus, contradicting herself by becoming the very thing that she condemns.
“Inclusivism” is a mere empty word that those who cannot admit, or do not understand, that they themselves are exclusivists apply to themselves for politically correct or otherwise psychological reasons.Likewise, with the term “relativism” as self-proclaimed relativists are absolutely certain that relativism is absolute true.Likewise, with being “tolerant” as the tolerant do not tolerate the intolerant and thus become intolerant themselves.And on it goes.The bottom line is that exclusivism is the only logical option and if you disagree, you have succeeded only in proving the point.Let us delve into the heart of Oprah Winfrey’s and Eckhart Tolle’s contradictory hypocrisy as they, preaching the one true way, claim to not preach the one true way while condemning anyone that does not follow their one true way:
Oprah Winfrey: _one of the things that Eckhart says in the beginning of this book on page six is this book’s main purpose is not to add information or beliefs to your mind, or to try to convince you of anything, but to bring about a shift in consciousness. That is to say, to awaken_The important thing is that religion doesn’t become an ideology_the moment you say “only my belief” or “our belief” is true, and you deny other people’s beliefs, then you’ve adopted an ideology. And then religion becomes a closed door_Elizabeth Lesser_talks about old spirituality versus the new spirituality and she says the old was – the old way is the hierarchy has the authority. Church authorities tell you how to worship in church and how to behave outside of church. The new spirituality is that you are your own best authority as you work to know and love yourself, you discover how to live a more spiritual life.The old is God and the path to worship him have already been defined and all you need to do is follow the directions. The new is being able to listen within for your own definition of spirituality, your deeper longings are under search_
That there’s only one path it’s the right way and all other ways are wrong. And the spirituality says that many paths lead to spiritual freedom and peace.
This is the exclusivity that we defined at the beginning of this essay; note the constant exclusivism in their pseudo-inclusivism; it amounts to we are right and anyone who disagrees is wrong.Firstly, Eckhart Tolle says the he is not attempting to “convince you of anything, but to bring about a shift in consciousness. That is to say, to awaken” but read it this way: Eckhart is not attempting “convince you of anything” except that he is attempting to “bring about a shift in consciousness_to awaken.”This awakened shift in consciousness necessitates that “religion doesn’t become an ideology”-this is an ideology as it straightforward demands that “religion doesn’t become an ideology.”What they are stating is that “only my belief” or “our belief”-Oprah’s and Eckhart’s-“is true” and thereby they “deny other people’s beliefs” and so they have “adopted an ideology” which means that their neo-spirituality is “a closed door.”
Note that the “old spirituality” is juxtaposed with the “new spirituality”-the old is bad and only the new is good. What the church tells you is wrong and what is right is to place yourself in the ultimate place of authority. Fine, but what if I accept that I am my authority but have concluded that the very best and only way is that the church authorities should tell us how to worship in church and how to behave outside of church? All of a sudden, my neo-spiritual way is wrong.Moreover, “The old” which is wrong is that “God and the path to worship him have already been defined and all you need to do is follow the directions.” This seems a good time to correct two common misconceptions: Christianity is not a religion and the church does not mean an authoritative hierarchy such as a man-made bishopric, rabbinate, imamate, or guruship.
Christianity is about developing a close and personal relationship with God thought Jesus and the church refers to those who are engaged in such a relationship (in fact, the Bible is the most anti-religion book ever published).
But you see the point? The old church way is wrong and only the neo-spiritual is right.Note that they are stating that the view that “there’s only one path it’s the right way and all other ways are wrong” is wrong. In fact, note that the statement was that “the spirituality says that many paths lead to spiritual freedom and peace”; did you catch it? “many paths lead to_” they say “many” and not “all” and so they restrict the true path to that with which they agree.
Thus, their way is that “there’s only one path it’s the right way” their way “and all other ways are wrong.”