Today I continue discussing the task of preaching in a time of religious pluralism by examing the history of the church in apologetics. You can view the first post in this series by clicking the link below. 

Part 1: The Nature of Religious Pluralism 

Religious Pluralism in Church History

The spiritual world that embryonic Christianity was born into was profoundly pluralistic. Most people’s opinion in that society was that all these religions had merit.[1]The Romans had subjugated the known world, with people from many different geographical regions and religious backgrounds. In such an extensive historical and geographical framework, the pressures of pluralism are not surprising.[2]

Growing up in the Greco-Roman world, Christianity struggled with every kind of opponent. The philosophers and poets of the day held to a largely impersonal view of the universe. They had been conducting a polemic against the traditional concepts of divinity for centuries. Meanwhile, the mass of people engaged in the concerns of mundane life, with all of its joys and sorrow, all of its cravings for comfort and encouragements, and its need for hope-giving assurances that would make like worth living, there flowed an unfailing stream of popular religions. These religions solved the problems over which the philosophers were worrying with all their worldly wisdom. By the time of the birth of Christianity, the Greco-Roman world was rife with popular religions thrown together in association by the mighty empire that provided for ease of communication and transportation while blending peoples of various backgrounds. It was indeed a diverse world, and the Romans allowed the plurality of religions if the people would submit to worship Caesar as the supreme god.[3]    

The early church had to confront this culture, and they did so with courtesy. They extended courtesy towards those who believed in pluralism, but they did not approve of those other religions as an alternative way of salvation. The New Testament writers did not distinguish between the pluralism of the day and the idolatry of the day. To them, pluralism was simply idolatry. Therefore, the church did not as much oppose the pluralism of the day as it defied it.[4] They were attacked because of their stance.

As the early church was attacked by Jewish leaders, Romans, philosophers, and politicians, the church responded by offering a defense for the faith. Paul did not use only one method of preaching. He adapted his homiletics without compromising the gospel.[5]When Paul preached to the Jews, he used the Old Testament texts. When it came to preaching to the Greeks, he had to reach them another way.

Paul felt it necessary to establish an entire framework, a framework very largely at odds with the pluralism of the day if the gospel of Christ was to be understood and accepted on its own terms.[6] Although it is apparent that the church engaged in the culture and at times tried to become pluralistic, the writings of Paul and the early church fathers kept bringing them back to the fact that Christianity is exclusive. Within half a century, Christianity had spread around the Mediterranean and grown so prominently that there were complaints of the pagan temples being vacated.[7]Yet admittedly, the pluralism of the Roman Empire was not driven by the engines of naturalism, as is our present variety.[8]