John Hick's pluralism

I will first begin by explaining what pluralism is - pluralism is the idea that all religions worship a manifestation of the ultimate reality (or being). I am writing a paper in response to John Hick's pluralism. First of all, when everybody is right, nobody is right: if the buddhists are correct and there isn't a deity, then how can those who are followers of the Triune God be right? How can Christians rightly be said to worship the true living God? Second, Hick claims that most religions are the result of cultural perspectives, yet, Christianity began as an Eastern religion. Has anybody heard of the Eastern Orthodox Church? However, Christianity is often considered a Western religion. So I really think that religions are too diverse to use cultural diversity to explain their differences. Hick believes that every major religion teaches compassion for their fellow man. Once again I think that this is incorrect, Christianity would claim that we have compassion for our fellow man because of the Grace of the Holy Spirit in our lives. Also, I would ask if Islam really teaches compassion for one's fellow man. Is Jihad an Islamic notion? What is the meaning of Jihad, are the terrorists true muslims or a part of the rebel fringe of Islam? If terrorists are true Muslims, then Islam doesn't seem to teach compassion for one's fellow man.

This is about it, my arguments will be a bit more complex, but this is just a simple summary critique of John Hick.