I would call myself something of an exclusive-inclusivist or, perhaps, an inclusive-exclusivist. :-) I believe that Jesus is the only way to God, that only He can reconcile to God, that only He has the unique credentials for doing so, etc.
At the same time, I also am something of an accessibilist, believing that all people have some access to God that may, in His grace, lead them to a saving knowledge of Him. Obviously, traditional evangelicals have long believed in natural revelation; this allows for certain limited knowledge of God. But accessibilism goes a bit beyond this, saying that at some level God could theoretically be accessed in a saving (or, at least, an “on-the-way-to-saving” way). I'm not saying that I have some percentage in mind as to how many who don’t hear (or simply don't understand) the gospel are actually redeemed. It might be a small number or a large one. Nor am I saying that people are saved by works, inaccurate religious beliefs, etc. I’m simply saying that the One who is indeed Savior, that is, Jesus, can (and perhaps does) reveal Himself to people who have little access to traditional Christian beliefs. Sometimes, perhaps, a strand of truth within an otherwise “false religion” might be utilized to, as it were, “bring them in.” Other times, God may simply link up with the human heart to show a person that he/she is lost, requires rescue, and must rely upon (believe, trust in) the God who is, shall we say, standing right in front of us all (whatever our current knowledge base or limitations). Does this make any sense?
I guess what I'm saying is that the verbal proclamation of the Gospel paradigm is still normative for those of us who already have it. We are accountable for our faithfulness in word and (especially!) life.
At the same time, God is alive and well and able to access the hearts of people who have incomplete perceptions of Him (which, I suppose, if we pushed it, would include all of us!).
While we cannot presume upon God’s activity to save those who are somewhat (or greatly) lacking in evangelistic formulas, we should assume that He is indeed present among people, desires their rescue, actively pursues whomever He wants, and typically (and I think this is important) is a God of amazing surprises. (That sounds rather strange doesn't it? — “Typical surprises!” Hmm.) Think, for instance, of how He turned the world upside down when He confronted the Pharisees of His day. They were the conservatives of the time, the upholders of truth, etc. While they certainly believed many correct things, they could not bring themselves to imagine that God might rescue those outside of their prescribed religious circles. Yet, Jesus didn’t care and did not allow their theological box (helpful as it may have been in many ways) to limit His saving agenda. So, He walked in among a group of basic ignoramuses, people who surely did not possess much systematic knowledge of God, and He boldly declared that “salvation has come to this house!” Wow, how can you do that Jesus? After all, these people don’t have all their “t’s” crossed and their “i’s” dotted! My only point is that we should almost expect that God does similar things today and in every era.
So, for me, it is not too difficult to imagine that God could be at work in the hearts of some member of even a false religion. Should we still point out inaccuracies and errors? Of course! Should we warn people when it is appropriate? Definitely! Certainly, we don't want to be naive about these matters. At the same time, however, God is much bigger than our models of Him. Are all (or even most) members of false religions saved? I doubt it! Do we have the duty to set them straight and point them in the right direction? Yes! But we can also look to see what work God is already doing among such people. Sometimes, that work is substantial. Other times, it is not. We can’t judge the heart either way. But we can approach these matters with much more humility and graciousness and, perhaps, expectation . . . that God is already involved with some of these people. (As an aside, I sometimes wonder if God is most absent from the current “possessors” of truth.)
There is still truth and error and, as far as we can tell, a normative pattern: Go to others and lead them to Jesus via His gospel, for there is no salvation apart from faith in God’s Son. However, I think we should also be open to the possibility that there may be more going on than we normally realize. Sometimes (not always) the God of expectations is an imaginary one, who gets in the way of the true God of unexpected grace and amazing surprises. I hope this doesn't sound too “wishy-washy.” There is no thought here of denying the essential views of orthodoxy. Rather, there is a desire to compliment these views with other truths drawn from Scripture. More so, I hope to reflect the basic attitude promoted in Scripture in which we humbly seek, discover, embrace, and share the whole of what God has revealed. Ultimately, this entails a seeking, discovery, embrace, and sharing of Him!
At the same time, I also am something of an accessibilist, believing that all people have some access to God that may, in His grace, lead them to a saving knowledge of Him. Obviously, traditional evangelicals have long believed in natural revelation; this allows for certain limited knowledge of God. But accessibilism goes a bit beyond this, saying that at some level God could theoretically be accessed in a saving (or, at least, an “on-the-way-to-saving” way). I'm not saying that I have some percentage in mind as to how many who don’t hear (or simply don't understand) the gospel are actually redeemed. It might be a small number or a large one. Nor am I saying that people are saved by works, inaccurate religious beliefs, etc. I’m simply saying that the One who is indeed Savior, that is, Jesus, can (and perhaps does) reveal Himself to people who have little access to traditional Christian beliefs. Sometimes, perhaps, a strand of truth within an otherwise “false religion” might be utilized to, as it were, “bring them in.” Other times, God may simply link up with the human heart to show a person that he/she is lost, requires rescue, and must rely upon (believe, trust in) the God who is, shall we say, standing right in front of us all (whatever our current knowledge base or limitations). Does this make any sense?
I guess what I'm saying is that the verbal proclamation of the Gospel paradigm is still normative for those of us who already have it. We are accountable for our faithfulness in word and (especially!) life.
At the same time, God is alive and well and able to access the hearts of people who have incomplete perceptions of Him (which, I suppose, if we pushed it, would include all of us!).
While we cannot presume upon God’s activity to save those who are somewhat (or greatly) lacking in evangelistic formulas, we should assume that He is indeed present among people, desires their rescue, actively pursues whomever He wants, and typically (and I think this is important) is a God of amazing surprises. (That sounds rather strange doesn't it? — “Typical surprises!” Hmm.) Think, for instance, of how He turned the world upside down when He confronted the Pharisees of His day. They were the conservatives of the time, the upholders of truth, etc. While they certainly believed many correct things, they could not bring themselves to imagine that God might rescue those outside of their prescribed religious circles. Yet, Jesus didn’t care and did not allow their theological box (helpful as it may have been in many ways) to limit His saving agenda. So, He walked in among a group of basic ignoramuses, people who surely did not possess much systematic knowledge of God, and He boldly declared that “salvation has come to this house!” Wow, how can you do that Jesus? After all, these people don’t have all their “t’s” crossed and their “i’s” dotted! My only point is that we should almost expect that God does similar things today and in every era.
So, for me, it is not too difficult to imagine that God could be at work in the hearts of some member of even a false religion. Should we still point out inaccuracies and errors? Of course! Should we warn people when it is appropriate? Definitely! Certainly, we don't want to be naive about these matters. At the same time, however, God is much bigger than our models of Him. Are all (or even most) members of false religions saved? I doubt it! Do we have the duty to set them straight and point them in the right direction? Yes! But we can also look to see what work God is already doing among such people. Sometimes, that work is substantial. Other times, it is not. We can’t judge the heart either way. But we can approach these matters with much more humility and graciousness and, perhaps, expectation . . . that God is already involved with some of these people. (As an aside, I sometimes wonder if God is most absent from the current “possessors” of truth.)
There is still truth and error and, as far as we can tell, a normative pattern: Go to others and lead them to Jesus via His gospel, for there is no salvation apart from faith in God’s Son. However, I think we should also be open to the possibility that there may be more going on than we normally realize. Sometimes (not always) the God of expectations is an imaginary one, who gets in the way of the true God of unexpected grace and amazing surprises. I hope this doesn't sound too “wishy-washy.” There is no thought here of denying the essential views of orthodoxy. Rather, there is a desire to compliment these views with other truths drawn from Scripture. More so, I hope to reflect the basic attitude promoted in Scripture in which we humbly seek, discover, embrace, and share the whole of what God has revealed. Ultimately, this entails a seeking, discovery, embrace, and sharing of Him!
No comments:
Post a Comment