It's no secret that the world is full of religions. Even within any given religion one is sure to
find various flavors” and varieties. Christendom alone offers something like 40,000 different denominational flavors. Suffice it to say, there isn’t much agreement about what is true spiritually. Of course, this in no way means that some view isn’t correct, but discerning which, if any, is correct is a significant undertaking.
Now, generally speaking, Christianity is an exclusivist religion. This means that Christianity (or Christians) maintain that the tenets (or at least some of the tenets) of Christianity are in fact true and that any propositions, including other religious beliefs, that are incompatible with these tenets are false.
For the record, I agree with the exclusivist position of Christianity. All roads may lead to Rome, but the same cannot be said for truth. The question of whether Christianity is, in fact, true is a topic for another time. Rather, let us suppose for the sake of argument that Christianity is true. What I would like to consider is the following question: Is there both a philosophical and biblical basis for inclusivism?
This may seem like a strange question given that I just endorsed exclu- sivism, so allow me to clarify. By “inclusivism” I mean more specifically soteriological inclusivism, which is the view that although Christianity is true (in the exclusivist sense), there are individuals who are saved despite not having formed the belief set B generally taken to be sufficient for salvation. This set B of beliefs would include beliefs such as I am a sinner and Jesus is God.
At this point I leave this as an open question and am interested in what people think. In another post I’ll argue why I think inclusivism might be true on Christianity.
Epictetus said, Content yourself with being a lover of wisdom, a seeker of the truth. One could say this is the very purpose of Ryan Downie’s life. What drives him, he said, is knowledge and understanding, an insatiable desire to learn.