Salvation in a Pluralistic World

One of the most controversial questions in our society today has to do with the question of who will find salvation from death and the evil of this life. It is quite a politically incorrect position to hold that not everyone is worthy or able to attain to salvation, and that some may in fact find themselves in a worse position in the coming life. The historic Christian understanding, however, is exactly that. Although Christ came and died for sin, there will be those, a great many some might say, who do not receive this salvation and are damned. Not everyone has a pass to enter the kingdom of heaven. Yet, there are some considerations with which we must work through. How can a loving God sentence some to eternal death? What are the exact qualifications that one must have in order find salvation? Clearly, these are not easy questions, made even harder because we are simply not given total insight into the mind and judgment of Christ. It is the purpose of this paper to briefly review one major view of salvation, which seems to me to be the most accurate understanding. The view I will cover is Clark Pinnock’s inclusivist view of salvation. I will then dialogue with this view in light of the responses and arguments which can be held against inclusivism.

Those who believe that there is more than one way to God and that religions are more or less equal in their salvific ability are called pluralists. Those who feel that salvation comes in explicit faith in Jesus Christ, declaring and responding to the specifics of the Christian message alone, are called particularists. These two positions are not the only choices, but rather are the ends of a spectrum of beliefs on how God works in this world. For an inclusivist, salvation is in Christ alone. His life and sacrifice bring life to those who believe in him and give them access to the kingdom of God. Yet, the question arises of what exactly this belief might entail. Unlike the strict particularists, Clark Pinnock is willing to say that belief in Christ may not be limited to acceptance of certain propositional statements. As he defines it, “inclusivism believes that, because God is present in the whole world, God’s grace is also at work in some way among all people, possibly even in the sphere of religious life.” [1] He continues by saying that inclusivism “entertains the possibility that religion may play a role in the salvation of the human race, a role preparatory to the gospel of Christ, in whom alone fullness of salvation is found.” Other religions do not offer salvation, but the Spirit is active even in those outside of the church, leading many to God in an abundance of ways. Other religions may have qualities or wisdom which give insights into the mind of God, and which lead them to the person of Christ (though the specific name might not be present in their thoughts).

Inclusivists believe that God is truly loving, working in the lives of those outside of the Christian church, offering his grace in ways which are beyond our understanding. Thus, Inclusivists are willing to accept that other religions, people from diverse backgrounds and different experiences may have something to offer in their understanding of the Divine. There arises a willingness to dialogue and learn from others, rather than to simply preach at them. Christian theology is seen as the fullest understanding, however, and where understandings of God and Jesus are disputed, Christianity has the correct view. One of the most vivid examples of this theology can be seen at the end of C.S. Lewis’ Last Battle, where the honest devotion of a servant of Tash is understood as applying to Aslan in truth. This view has a great emphasis on the love and grace of God in salvation, and seeks to understand how other religions can seem to have truth and insights which truly affect the lives of their adherents.

In developing my own position I find a need to fit my views within a framework of thought. There are three sources of authority in my thinking that I must balance and work through in order to find confidence in my opinion. The first is the area of experience. This is the primary guide for those who hold to a pluralistic view of salvation. It would be difficult indeed to say that those outside of the Christian church are devoid of religious life. Having known, listened to, and spoken with those of other faiths, I find that oftentimes I am the one enriched by their understandings. It seems as though God is in fact working in the lives of others, giving insights into his being. Indeed, as Romans 1:21ff. discusses, God is knowable by what has been made, and it seems that some have gotten to know him. But, I would not go as far as the pluralists in saying that all thought is equal. There are times in which various philosophies and religions contradict each other. It does not seem plausible to me to say that Islam and Christianity are simply two different paths to God. Yet, after seeing the movie Malcolm X I wondered if at the time of his death Malcolm had a better understanding of God than the great majority of Christians he had been in contact with throughout his life. While there are particulars in his theology I would disagree with, it seems as though he was being called into a fuller relationship with the One God. Grace seemed to be active in his life, maybe even to the point of salvation.

The next area I must deal with is Church Tradition. In studying the early church one is immediate struck by the fact that Christians were not necessarily persecuted for worshipping Christ, but rather for worshipping Christ in exclusion to the other gods. Thus Christians were killed precisely because they would not accept pluralism. The Fathers of the church, and the many leaders since that time refused to accept that salvation is found outside of Christ, and in many cases outside of the Church. Yet, missionaries are continually struck by the seeming preparation that cultures have been given prior to the arrival of the Gospel message. Pinnock quotes Wesley (certainly one who knew evangelism) as saying, “We have great reason to hope, although they lived among the heathen, yet (many of them) were quite of another spirit, being taught of God, by his inward voice, all the essentials of the true religion.” [2] Those who have, arguably, been most successful in the missionary enterprise have been those who acknowledge and use the insights and wisdom of particular cultures in leading them to the fuller message of Christ. Thus, tradition gives a balance to the spectrum of salvation.

The most effective argument, for me, comes from the direction of the exclusivists. They argue well from Scripture that salvation is from Christ alone to the exclusion of all other beliefs and experiences. [3] As Scripture is a strong guide for what I believe, it is essential that I come to terms with this position. It seems that passages such as John 3:16ff. take a position which strongly support the exclusivist view. This is a hard position to argue. Yet, the propositional theology of the exclusivists does not seem to adequately portray the message of Christ and the early Apostles. Rather than the acceptance of certain statements, the New Testament as a whole seems to convey the message of “knowing is doing”. That is those who know Christ do what he commands, and walk as he would have them walk.

Thus we see throughout the Bible, especially seen in the Old Testament, salvation coming to those who walk in righteousness. Gentiles, in the New Testament, are oftentimes more receptive to the Gospel than are the Jews, to whom God first revealed himself. Does the New Testament allow for actual salvation outside of Christ. It does not seem so. But I do believe that the propositional theology does not adequately convey the fullness of knowing Christ. To know Christ is not just to acknowledge certain statements, but to live as he would have us live. Someone who understands a concept, is able to work out a meaning, but does not have the specific vocabulary word to use seems to be better off than one who has the word but does not understand the concept or definition. Thus, to know Christ is not simply to use the name Jesus, but to understand his message and to live a life of holiness. One can then, through the work of the Spirit, come to know Christ, but may not have the specific language we would call Christian.

Obviously, this is not a definitive argument for my position but rather a working out of the tensions created by the various influences in my thought. As one with a fundamentalist background the argument from Scripture is strong indeed for my thought. Yet, it seems that God is not limited to our own understandings, and that Jesus himself frequently crossed the boundaries which were set up for him by those who he knew intimately. God is a loving God. God is full of grace and life for all who believe in him. He is just and merciful. With this comes the clear message of coming judgment for all. Some would seek to limit God’s activity to what has been clearly spelled out for us in the New Testament. Some would seek to open up God’s grace to all, no matter what their views or positions. Yet in my understanding of God and Scripture what is apparent is that more often than not people are surprised by how God works. He has his own mind, and the stories of others are not ours to know.

We have been called to share with others the message that He has given the Church, and have been warned against the dangers of falling away from this message. Yet, it seems that God works with His Church, outside His church, and sometimes in spite of His church. I cannot believe that the weight of the world’s salvation is on my shoulders. Rather, I must trust in His justice, doing my part in making disciples and resting in the knowledge that no matter what, His plan for every single person will be accomplished. My guess is that heaven will be an exciting place filled with people who we would not expect to be there and missing many of those who we would. Thank God that the burden of judgment is not ultimately in our hands but in the hands of one who is all-wise and all-loving, and who will fulfill the duty of judgment with a justice that will be apparent to all.

[1] Clark Pinnock, “An Inclusivist View” Four Views on Salvation in a Pluralistic World eds. Dennis Okholm and Timothy Phillips (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 98.

[2] Quoted in Clark Pinnock, “An Inclusivist View” Four Views on Salvation in a Pluralistic World, Dennis Okholm and Timothy Phillips eds. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 119.

[3] See R. Douglas Geivett and W. Gary Phillips “A Particularist view: An Evidentialist Approach”, Four Views, 229ff. for a full discussion of the seeming Scriptural position.