Inclusivism

[Hammster]

Is there any biblical support for inclusivism (aka anonymous Christian)? If so, what is it?

 

[All Souls]

Melchizedek (Genesis 14:18) and the Wise Men (Matthew 2:1-13) are examples of people who believed in God even though they were not part of the covenant people.

The parable of the sheep and the goats (Matthew 25:31-46) portrays the judgment of the nations as being based on each individual's compassion on others, not on their religious background.

Paul said that the Greeks had been worshiping God without knowing it. He said that in their semi-enlightened condition, they might grope for God and find Him, since He was not far from each one of us. Their own poets had declared that they were God's offspring. This shows that He was somewhat known to them. Acts 17:23-28

 

[Hammster]

Melchizedek (Genesis 14:18) and the Wise Men (Matthew 2:1-13) are examples of people who believed in God even though they were not part of the covenant people.

Not sure how that's relevant.

The parable of the sheep and the goats (Matthew 25:31-46) portrays the judgment of the nations as being based on each individual's compassion on others, not on their religious background.

No, they were separated because they were sheep and goats. Their actions didn't make them so.

Paul said that the Greeks had been worshiping God without knowing it. He said that in their semi-enlightened condition, they might grope for God and find Him, since He was not far from each one of us. Their own poets had declared that they were God's offspring. This shows that He was somewhat known to them. Acts 17:23-28

If if your understanding of that passage was correct, it doesn't lead to inclusivism.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Is there any biblical support for inclusivism (aka anonymous Christian)? If so, what is it?

The only kind I can conceive of from Scripture would be a Covenantal inclusivism consisting of members of a household, including children.

But inclusivism as it is commonly generally understood, no. Scripture is clear, many are called few are chosen, the way is straight and narrow few that enter, in the words of our Lord “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me." One way to the Father, not multiple paths, there is a way that seems right to man but the end is destruction.

 

[parsley]

The Samaritans in Jesus' time were not considered in line with proper Judaism, but Jesus made sure to include them.

In Acts 10, Peter was shown the descending sheet of animals categorized as unclean; and concluded that God was asking him to include non-Jews in his ministry to others.

What we choose to believe is sometimes different from how we personally feel; what we choose to act on can be different from what we believe; what we believe is not always a full understanding of God's will. What God chooses to do can be different from what we expect of Him. How a church handles it, or individual cases, can also be different.

The scriptural stance is usually an effort to keep the precepts of the faith consistent, while being loving toward individuals. That can cause friction if someone begins speaking for the church, without lining up with the mission statement of the organization.

Controversy can also arise if ecumenical projects make people feel as though they are being asked to compromise their standards.

(aka anonymous Christian)

I am not familiar with the situation, so am speaking generally.

 

[Hammster]

The Samaritans in Jesus' time were not considered in line with proper Judaism, but Jesus made sure to include them.

In Acts 10, Peter was shown the descending sheet of animals categorized as unclean; and concluded that God was asking him to include non-Jews in his ministry to others.

What we choose to believe is sometimes different from how we personally feel; what we choose to act on can be different from what we believe; what we believe is not always a full understanding of God's will. What God chooses to do can be different from what we expect of Him. How a church handles it, or individual cases, can also be different.

The scriptural stance is usually an effort to keep the precepts of the faith consistent, while being loving toward individuals. That can cause friction if someone begins speaking for the church, without lining up with the mission statement of the organization.

Controversy can also arise if ecumenical projects make people feel as though they are being asked to compromise their standards.

I am not familiar with the situation, so am speaking generally.

Are you aware of what Inclusivism is?

 

[Ignatius21]

Is there any biblical support for inclusivism (aka anonymous Christian)? If so, what is it?

When I hear people speak of the "anonymous Christian" theory (didn't that originate with Karl Rahner?) it usually ends up being a very thin veneer covering an underlying universalism. Except, rather than saying that all paths lead to God (which would violate the uniqueness of Christ as mediator), they instead say that all paths lead to Christ and therefore it's all hunkey-dorey. In other words, be a good person and try not to be mean, and you'll be OK. All you have to do to be saved, essentially, is to die.

It's something I've given a fair amount of thought to, however. I also put the topic back on the shelf some time ago.

In order for that theory to hold, we would have to acknowledge some opportunity to repent and turn to faith in Christ after death. I cannot see this clearly indicated as a possibility in the Scriptures. I have read that, among the Church Fathers, except for those who actually did come to a point of universalism, there was no teaching that those who died apart from Christ could ever come to faith (and here I'm relying on second-hand sources, given how enormous was the corpus of even a few Fathers). There was a story among the Desert Fathers in Egypt about St. Macarius, in which he stumbled upon a skull in the desert, and in a vision it spoke to him. It said "I was a pagan priest." It described that, in the world of death, there is no light and the souls there exist in utter isolation. It told St. Macarius, however, then when he prayed for them, they received a little light and were not so alone. I think that story can be intererpeted in various ways, however, even there it gives no inkling that the early Christians believed that prayer could help non-Christians to somehow become Christians after death.

So I think the safest answer is "no." I cannot accept the "anonymous Christian" idea in any dogmatic sense. And certainly, if it were true that we only need to be moral people who follow our consciences (which, of course, are bound by sin and fear of death)--then why the command from the Lord to preach to all nations and call them to repentance? Why risk preaching the Gospel and having them reject it to their peril? Why not let them just live the best lives they can as pagans? It makes no sense.

On the other hand, though, we have the early Christian understanding (which I believe is reflected in the letters of Peter) that Christ preached to the souls in Hades while his body rested in the tomb, and that those who'd lived according to the Law (righteously) followed him, while those who had lived wickedly, rejected him. This is the idea of "the Harrowing of Hades" that's reflected in the Orthodox Paschal icon (and also in much medieval art, although there Christ is often dressed like a medieval prince from Florence ). Hebrews speaks of those who had lived righteously as not receiving the reward "apart from us." Moses chose Christ, it says, over riches. Yet Moses had very little light as to who Christ was. So, in living faithfully for God and obeying his commandments, Moses lived for Christ though he had not yet come in the flesh.

Paul seems to indicate that such could be true for Gentiles...who "are a law unto themselves." Of course, he speaks of God overlooking past sins, but "now commands all people everywhere to repent."

So is it possible that a pagan could have lived (or still could?) virtuously according to the light given to him by whatever means, though in ignorance of the Gospel, and yet recognize his savior after death? I don't know. Scripture certainly doesn't say as much. But it doesn't explicitly say it can't happen, either. Some of the Greek fathers, I believe, toyed with the notion that the virtuous pagans (like the philosophers) could possibly have been living according to the Gospel, though without knowing it.

In the end, I really do like the ending of the Chronicles of Narnia, where one of the loyal soldiers of the false God "Tash" (who clearly seems to represent Islam...) has died, and now meets Aslan (representing Christ) in the next life. He confesses to Aslan that he'd been deceived all his life, told by his own leaders that Aslan was actually the evil one, was given a false picture of Aslan, and therefore served Tash in ignorance. Aslan tells him "I will count service to Tash, as service to myself." Lewis, at least, saw a clear distinction between someone who lived life selfishly and wickedly, and someone who lived virtuously but in ignorance, or under a deception of a false religion.

So where do I fall on the matter ultimately? I prefer the Narnia scenario. That is to say, I would like for it to be so. I don't think it's ruled out. However, as best I can tell, the majority witness of the Scriptures and the church do not recognize the ability to turn and repent after death.

I guess the takeaway is that we are to preach the Gospel to all men and simply trust that God's mercy and justice will deal fairly with all. That much, we know will be true. The rest is speculation that cannot be allowed to deter us from spreading the light of Christ to all nations.

 

[abacabb3]

I really feel compelled to say that the answer is very obvious. Inclusivism and universalism are excluded by Scripture. Actually, I find the entire Gospel incomprehensible if those systems of belief are true.

What exactly am I being saved from if there are different ways to Christ other than confessing His name (Rom 10:9) after being preached His name (Rom 10:14)?

Am I just doing a better job looking for Christ out there, though His light be obscured if I live in a Muslim country? Am I just smarter that I know there must be a God out there and I need forgiveness somehow, even though there are none that seek God, not one? Am I just better that I do more good than bad, and after all, that's what Jesus supposedly wants anyway?

All of these absurd ideas absolutely gut the Gospel, and to be honest, Paul would have stood up to them in a fit of rage being that not even eating with Gentiles was considered a "Gospel issue" to Paul.

Universalism and inclusivism spring up from the delusion in man's mind that he is somehow more just than God and that he is good enough to save himself. All lies.

For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
So are My ways higher than your ways
And My thoughts than your thoughts. (Is 55:9)

 

[sdowney717]

Inclusivism is Satanic.

Jesus is God. God is Jesus.

Because Jesus says no one comes to the Father but through Him, AND Jesus says if you do not believe that I am HE, you will die in your sins. It is a very narrow road the gospel of His dear son.

The demons and evil people of the world in opposition to Christ being antichrist which is also antiGod are going to push an alternative, that Christ is good way, but you dont need Him, your revelation of God is ok because you acted in good conscious, good faith about what you knew or were taught to be true. God is love and fair and will judge you only for what you knew, it is not your fault you were born into a different religion. Maybe even the idea that all things work to the good of all who just love 'god' is all the true God, whoever He is, needs to justify you. I used to work with a high cast Hindu Brahman women that believed that. She fully accepted Christianity as truth, and her own Hinduism as God's revealed truth for her. She also worshiped idols. I visited her house and she showed me her prayer room, and there they were, all blue and lovely, gods and goddesses. She continually rejected Christ. We were friends, she was a nice person, she wanted me to accept her faith as ok, and I told her I never would.

I know the idea to evil, worldly people is repugnant to say a narrow road is the truth, Christ being the only way. There are people in my family that believe that. they will say for themselves, I am a Christian, but a Muslim is also saved if he follows that path being there are many paths to God and a God of love would never reject others who loved that 'god' revealed to them in their faith. For me to even suggest otherwise, they say I am evil. Anyhow Allah, is not God.

18 “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. 21 But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been done in God.”

Evil people practice evil because they love not the truth in the light and they refuse to come to God, repent and be saved, because they are evil. They will not believe in Him and confess Christ the only way to God. they are condemned already because they have not believed.

People who do the truth have deeds done in God and they come to the light.
They will be or are saved. Having deeds done in God means God worked in them arranging all things to their good because they were called of God. Everyone God calls in that way end up conformed to the image of Christ.

 

[hedrick]

There are at least two Biblical bases: Rom 2 and Jesus’ teaching.

Jesus taught that we would be judged based on whether we love God and other people, shown in how we treat them. He said that he didn’t care whether you say “Lord, Lord,” but whether you do what he says.

Rom 2 speaks of people who follow the Law because it’s written in their hearts, which is essentially what the concept “anonymous Christian” means. Admittedly he was speaking of Judaism and not Christianity, but I don’t see why his analysis wouldn’t still apply.

Other Biblical examples cited include Melchizedek and Cornelius (though I'm not sure sure about Cornelius; as a God-fearer he was effectively a Jew).

One question to think about: Most Christians believe that people dying in infancy are saved. If that’s true, it’s an example of God saving people without explicit faith. So is there some magic age at which that reverses?

No, I’m not a universalist. I think Jesus’ teaching is pretty clear about judgement. Like most mainliners, my theology is primarily based on Jesus’ teaching.

 

[abacabb3]

One question to think about: Most Christians believe that people dying in infancy are saved. If that’s true, it’s an example of God saving people without explicit faith. So is there some magic age at which that reverses?

I for one reject this teaching for that very reason.

 

[hedrick]

I for one reject this teaching for that very reason.

So if you take Rom 10:9 in the literal way that your previous two posts suggest, does that mean that you reject salvation even of children living within a Christian family? That would disagree with Paul. But if you allow for it, then there have to be exceptions to explicit faith in Christ.

 

[hedrick]

I guess the takeaway is that we are to preach the Gospel to all men and simply trust that God's mercy and justice will deal fairly with all. That much, we know will be true. The rest is speculation that cannot be allowed to deter us from spreading the light of Christ to all nations.

I agree. But that should come not just from doubt whether people can be saved, but from a conviction that people really are better off in the Kingdom of God.

 

[Ignatius21]

I agree. But that should come not just from doubt whether people can be saved, but from a conviction that people really are better off in the Kingdom of God.

Well said

 

[Ignatius21]

Evil people practice evil because they love not the truth in the light and they refuse to come to God, repent and be saved, because they are evil. They will not believe in Him and confess Christ the only way to God. they are condemned already because they have not believed.

Jesus, though, was here speaking of those who had seen the truth yet still rejected him. His words in the Gospel of John were in the context of "He came to his own, and his own did not receive him." The rejection, by the Jews, of their own Messiah is a major theme of that Gospel.

Is there no difference, in your mind, between someone who hears Jesus preaching and sees his miracles, and still rejects him, and someone who never encounters Christ at all? Or (to use Lewis' analogy again) is raised in place where he is lied to, and told that Christ is something other than what he is?

(I'm not arguing for inclusivism. I'm just exploring this a little further.)

 

[abacabb3]

So if you take Rom 10:9 in the literal way that your previous two posts suggest, does that mean that you reject salvation even of children living within a Christian family? That would disagree with Paul. But if you allow for it, then there have to be exceptions to explicit faith in Christ.

Yes, because you are stretching the meaning of 1 Cor 7 to mean that if children are sanctified by a believing spouse, then so are unbelieving spouses, which is incorrect.

 

[abacabb3]

Is there no difference, in your mind, between someone who hears Jesus preaching and sees his miracles, and still rejects him, and someone who never encounters Christ at all?

Easy answer: No.

Real answer: Yes (see Matthew 11:24). However, Jesus consigns both to judgment, just one part is more harshly judged.

 

[sdowney717]

Easy answer: No.

Real answer: Yes (see Matthew 11:24). However, Jesus consigns both to judgment, just one part is more harshly judged.

So are there degrees of punishment in hell?
as in Dante's inferno?

That was pure speculation.

 

[sdowney717]

Jesus, though, was here speaking of those who had seen the truth yet still rejected him. His words in the Gospel of John were in the context of "He came to his own, and his own did not receive him." The rejection, by the Jews, of their own Messiah is a major theme of that Gospel.

Is there no difference, in your mind, between someone who hears Jesus preaching and sees his miracles, and still rejects him, and someone who never encounters Christ at all? Or (to use Lewis' analogy again) is raised in place where he is lied to, and told that Christ is something other than what he is?

(I'm not arguing for inclusivism. I'm just exploring this a little further.)

Scripturally, the result of unbelief is condemnation and destiny of hell fire.
John 3:18

And further on

31 He who comes from above is above all; he who is of the earth is earthly and speaks of the earth. He who comes from heaven is above all. 32 And what He has seen and heard, that He testifies; and no one receives His testimony. 33 He who has received His testimony has certified that God is true. 34 For He whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God does not give the Spirit by measure. 35 The Father loves the Son, and has given all things into His hand. 36 He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.”

Having the wrath of God on you certainly means judgement and hell and Lake of fire type death.

The final destination of a lake of fire is the same place they all will go and all go there into the same lake of fire. So are some parts of the lake hotter than others, I dont really think so.

We have a wonderful and truly fantastic salvation from the wrath of God.
He has performed His workmanship on us to conform us to the image of His Son.
So lets pay heed to it..Heb 2

New King James Version (NKJV)

Do Not Neglect Salvation

2 Therefore we must give the more earnest heed to the things we have heard, lest we drift away. 2 For if the word spoken through angels proved steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just reward, 3 how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him, 4 God also bearing witness both with signs and wonders, with various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to His own will?

Neglecting salvation here means not paying attention to Jesus, not reverencing His words, not believing in Jesus. Not being saved, not being obedient to His commands. Lets not tempt God shall we? Which is a good subject which I have not looked into, but I should.

1 Corinthians 10:9
New King James Version (NKJV)
9 nor let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed by serpents;

More of a direct answer to your post, I will think and respond in a little bit.

 

[sdowney717]

Jesus, though, was here speaking of those who had seen the truth yet still rejected him. His words in the Gospel of John were in the context of "He came to his own, and his own did not receive him." The rejection, by the Jews, of their own Messiah is a major theme of that Gospel.

Is there no difference, in your mind, between someone who hears Jesus preaching and sees his miracles, and still rejects him, and someone who never encounters Christ at all? Or (to use Lewis' analogy again) is raised in place where he is lied to, and told that Christ is something other than what he is?

(I'm not arguing for inclusivism. I'm just exploring this a little further.)

Never ever hearing the name of Christ is not excuse for any justification or right standing with God. Since all have fallen short of God's glory and all men are sinners and inclined to practice the works of the flesh which are listed as...

19 Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery,[c] fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, 20 idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, 21 envy, murders,[d] drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law. 24 And those who are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.

One of the fruits of the Spirit is faithfulness. Which would mean to Christ who is God. Those who commit (practice, which shows their unrepentance ) works of the flesh will not inherit the kingdom of God. All people who are not saved, in some way are committing sins and works of the flesh.

One very obvious warning comes from God the Father about liars and also another list of characteristics of those who will not inherit the kingdom. God specifically says their part will be in the lake of fire.

6 And He said to me, “It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. I will give of the fountain of the water of life freely to him who thirsts. 7 He who overcomes shall inherit all things, and I will be his God and he shall be My son. 8 But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”

An overcomer is one who believes and obeys the commandments of Christ. A destiny of Heaven and life with God and His Son and all their fellow saints and Holy angels is for these people that John the apostle says are those who overcome the world.

1 John 5
New King James Version (NKJV)
5 Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves Him who begot also loves him who is begotten of Him.

2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and keep His commandments.

3 For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome.

4 For whatever is born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world—our[a] faith.

5 Who is he who overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?

So clearly those without Christ, not in Christ, not regenerated, are as Paul wrote are described as 'having no hope and without God in the world.'

11 Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh—who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands— 12 that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.

So without the blood of Christ applied to you, then you have no hope of heaven, but a certain looking forward to of judgement and destiny the Lake of Fire, which is the second death.