Theologies of Religious Pluralism
EXCLUSIVISM
The term “exclusivist” was
originally a polemical term, chosen in part for its negative connotations. Some
have urged that it be replaced by the more neutral terms “particularism” or
“restrictivism.” (Netland 2001, 46; Kärkkäinen 2003, 80-1) This article retains
the common term because it is widespread and many have adopted the label for
their own theory of religious diversity.
Exclusivism denotes the theological
position that one’s own knowledge is a valid source for salvation and all other
knowledge is invalid. In terms of religious understanding Exclusivism claims
that the Christian understanding is the only way and all other understanding
hold no proper weightage.
Exclusivism affirms that there is
only One Living God, the Creator, who, in response to the radical fall of
humanity has taken action to reveal and save creation through particular
historical events recorded in the Bible.
In this article “exclusivism” about
religious diversity denies any form of pluralism; it denies that all religions,
or all “major ones,” are the same in some important respect. Insofar as a
religion claims to possess a diagnosis of the fundamental problem facing humans
and a cure, that is, a way to permanently and positively resolve this problem,
it will then assume that other, incompatible diagnoses and cures are incorrect.
Because of this, arguably exclusivism (or inclusivism, see section 4 below) is
a default view in religious traditions. Thus, for example, the earliest Buddhist
and Christian sources prominently feature staunch criticisms of various rival
teachings and practices as, respectively, false and useless or harmful.
(Netland 2001; Burton 2010)
Some philosophers, going against
the much-discussed identist pluralism of John Hick (see 2e above) use
“exclusivism” mean reasonable and informed religious belief which is not
pluralist. (O’Connor 1999) This “exclusivism” is compatible with both
exclusivism and inclusivism in this article. It is difficult to make a fully a clear distinction between exclusivist and inclusivist approaches. The basic
idea is that the inclusivist grants more of the values in question to religions
other than the single best religion – more truth, more salvific efficacy, more
veridical experience of the objects of religious experience, more genuine moral
transformation, and so forth.
Finally, because of their fit with
many traditional religious beliefs and commitments, sometimes exclusivism and
inclusivism are considered as two varieties of “confessionalism,” views on
which “one religion is…true and…we must view other religions in the light of
that fact.” (Byrne 2004, 203)
Biblical statement that supports exclusivity
Statements that affirm the necessity of belief in Christ pervades
the Gospel of John. The right to become “children of God” is given to those who
receive Christ (John 1:12). John 3:16 which is the epitome of the Bible message
gives a clear stand that “Who believes in God, One and Only Son...will not
perish but have eternal life. The belief in Jesus Christ is the only way to
escape condemnation.
Perhaps the strongest statement of exclusivity of Christ in the
entire Bible is found in Acts 4:12, “There is salvation in no one else, for
there is no other name under heaven given to people by which we must be saved”.
Four aspects in this verse emphasize the teaching on exclusivity-
First, the phrase “there is no one else” precedes the subject of “salvation”. This makes the point emphatically, “There is no one else at all
other than Jesus who has the means to provide salvation, even to Jews, who has
accessed to God’s Revelation.
Second, the phrase “under heaven” demonstrates just how extensive
Peter’s exclusion of all other names actually is.
Third, the words “we must” (dei, it is necessary) and “other”
(heteron) speak to the total degree of exclusivity in view.
Finally, the use of the word, “name” points to far more than
ontological source.
Three more narratives in
Acts bear directly on a Christian Theology of Religions- The stories of the
conversion of Cornelius (Acts 9-10); The Jerusalem Council (Acts 15), and the
Ephesians 12 (Acts 19:1-7)
The New Testament writers continue the proclamation of salvation
by grace a lone through faith (Rom 10:9-18; 2 Cor. 4:3-4; Gal. 3:2; Heb 1:1-4;
1 Pet. 1;22-25; 1 John 4:6)
Strands of Exclusivism
Exclusivism has a variety of views within it and questions to face.
One Major divide relate to the fate of the Unevangelized-those who never in
their lifetimes hear of Jesus Christ. Christopher J. H. Wright in his book, “Theology
of Religions” opines that, “Granted that Salvation is only in Christ (the
ontological necessity of Christ for salvation), is salvation also restricted to
those who come to know him explicitly (the epistemological necessity of
Christ)? Those who affirm that it is so restricted (labeled restrictivists by
others) point to the key text such John 14:6 and Acts 4:12.” This group wants
to restrict the act of salvation found in Jesus only to those who accepted
Jesus as personal Savior and follow the doctrines and dogmas of the visible church.
Others (non restrictivist exclusivist) are cautiously optimistic
that God will save some who, while unreached by Christian evangelism, turn in
some way from sin to God in repentance and faith. They point to the fact that the Old Testament believers were saved but had no knowledge of the Gospel of
Jesus Christ in its New Testament form. Still others (advocates of the wider
hope) affirm that through Christ God will save multitudes who have no
opportunity to know and trust him. They point to the pagan saint of the Old Testament)
Non-Israelites who became believers) as example of a wide phenomenon, no
exceptions and to text such as Rev. 7:9 as implying a very wide optimism of
salvation.
Exclusivism also has to wrestle with the extent to which it recognizes
general revelation in other religions and with the phenomenon of the actual
worship of their adherents. The term exclusivism itself is a negative term
because it denotes that someone is excluded and in this case, it is the majority
of humanity, therefore, is a need to rephrase this word and coin a new and suitable word which holds on to the uniqueness of Jesus and provides space to
others to be part of the salvation plan of Jesus as the heirs of Jesus reign.
However, from a clear reading of all Scripture tells us that a
personal, professed faith in Jesus Christ is required for salvation for all
people who are able to trust the gospel and believe. Now, though it appears to
most historical Christians and orthodox Christians that the Bible is clear in
teaching only one way to God, that doesn't mean that everyone who does not hear
the gospel is condemned to spend eternity separated from God. People who do not
have any opportunity to hear and respond to the gospel will be judged, but on
the basis of their response to the general revelation of God's goodness and His
moral law written on every heart (Romans 1), not for rejection of Jesus of whom
they have never heard.
.jpg)