It's All the Same

“Brussels sprouts and mint ice cream are the same. They’re both food items and they’re green. One is as good as the other. It doesn’t matter which of the two you choose since they taste the same.”

“Dogs and cats are the same. They’re both furry, four-legged pets. One is as good as the other. It doesn’t matter which you choose to have since they are indistinguishable from each other.”

“Christianity and Buddhism are the same. They’re both religions. One is as good as the other. It doesn’t matter which you choose since they teach the same thing.”

Why is it that saying either of the first two statements would get you locked up in an insane asylum, while saying the last one would get you all sorts of accolades? Sane human beings make distinctions.


I am not arguing today whether Christianity is better than Buddhism—or dogs than cats. That merits a separate discussion. But cannot we have the intellectual honesty to acknowledge that there is a difference between the two? Cannot we be forthright enough with the facts to agree that a Buddhist’s nirvana would be a Christian’s hell, inasmuch as the abolition of distinct personhood is a Buddhist’s hope and a Christian’s nightmare? Cannot we acknowledge that Christianity and Buddhism have different attitudes toward the existence of God (Christianity affirming His existence while Buddhism leaving the question open)? Cannot we admit that Christianity and Buddhism address fundamentally different concerns (Christianity seeks the redemption of the created world, while Buddhism seeks the avoidance of pain)? Cannot we agree that the two religions consequently propose different means to achieve their different ends?

Why do people try to equate the various religions? Sometimes they do so because they are too ignorant about religion to know the distinctions. I can’t tell Pepsi from Coca Cola because I drink soda so rarely that I don’t have enough of a basis to make a judgment on the matter. But that doesn’t mean they’re the same. Similarly, people who know very little about world religions are apt to make generalizations that aren’t true. But more often people talk this way because they figure that this is the only way that peace can exist among the various religions. Ignorant of history, these people assume that most wars have been fought over religion and so they assume that getting all religious people to agree that their religions are all the same will stop all wars. But while wars have sometimes been fought over religion, religion is a surprisingly rare cause of war; moreover, even wars that start out as overtly religious (such as the Thirty Years’ War) are quickly overtaken by political concerns and find the participants crossing confessional lines (as Catholic France and Protestant Prussia allied themselves against Catholic Austria and Protestant Denmark in that same war). You can have people of different religions living in the same or neighboring countries without going to war, just as you can put dog lovers and cat lovers in the same room and still keep the peace. To say otherwise is not only insulting to the various religions, but is also to dismiss the experience of most of history.

Ostensibly, ignoring the differences between religions will open dialogue. In reality, there is no quicker way to shut it down. As the French say, vive la différence!