I don't see why there wouldn't be many paths to god. Assuming there is a god... why would an omnipotent god be a selfish, one-track-minded egotistical bastard to want us to follow one particular path? Is he not omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent? Then all things are known to him... Why would he even obsess over such a fart of a speck of dust in the cosmos... much less care about our spoonfed opinions and outward manifestations of him when he already obviously knows what we're all thinking? A god could not be omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent, and then contain only those anthropomorphic qualities... ignoring all other forms of consciousness in favor of our own limited manifestation. It's completely contradictory. But then... the Bible-beaters would answer it's true because the Bible says it is. I've already discounted that line of reasoning in another thread. It is known as a self-perpetuating delusion... such arguments go something like this: It is true because it says it is, and because it says it's the absolute truth, then everything within it, including it's own self-referential "historical accounts" must also be true. In addition, not unlike a chain letter, it propagates itself with the same ferocity of a computer virus by declaring that if you believe, good things will happen, if you don't, bad things will happen. I need not comment on the absurdity of such self-promotion techniques. The basic litmus test that such faiths fail is that all other major faiths also claim exclusivity with god, with about as much valid evidence of their historical accuracy as any other. If god is infallible, then what is the fallibility by which each of these faiths mysteriously make claims of divine origin as well? If you answer that man is the fallible link in this chain of events... then one has to assume that your belief is also subject to man's fallibility, by way of the simple fact that you have no empirical, scientifically absolute evidence to prove otherwise.