Salvation in Christianity

(Originally written April 22, 2007 in Book 15)

A Tapestry of Faiths
Win Corduan

Is Christianity alone true?

By asking if a religion is true we ask if it is as a whole true, not if it contains some truth.

Pluralism asserts that all truth claims made by all religions are equal.

Hick claims that those Christians who maintain exclusivist theologies must revise their thinking.

Hick's pluralism is however, completely wrongheaded. No religion teaches that it is one way of relating to the Real.

Most, if not all, religions make exclusive claims. This is another point where Hick's theory does not accurately describe religions.

Hick's theory is either false or arbitrary if it is based on data from religion it is obviously false. If it is not then it is simply arbitrary.

Hick also demands that religions, especially Christianity, rewrite themselves to fit his theory. This is absurd.

Rather than an aggressive form of pluralism like Hick's, William P. Alston postulates a more subtle form:

1) Christians basing their beliefs on their mystical experience of God are justified in holding there beliefs.
2) Adherents of different religions basing their beliefs on their mystical experience are justified in holding their beliefs.
3) There is no way of adjudicating between different belief systems.
4) All persons are entitled to their beliefs since their system is coherent and productive.

Alston's theory hinges on mystical experience alone. He ignores any other type of evidence.

There are two component in accepting a belief system as true:
1) Accepting the beliefs as true
2) Justification of the belief system

Some ways of justifying religious beliefs:
1) They are self-evident
2) based on experience
3) superiority of teaching, etc., etc.

Christians can find confirmation for the beliefs in:
1) General revelation and natural theology
2) Fundamental rationality of Christian beliefs (Plantinga's "warrant" or "proper function")
3) Historical and archeological evidence
4) Inner witness of the Holy Spirit
5) Experience of when God manifested himself

Mainly, Christians have grounds for their beliefs that correspond to reality.

Christianity as a belief system based on the New Testament must be either false or exclusively true.

To deny pluralism one must show that it is rational to believe that Christianity is exclusively true.

Establishing Grounds for Answers

The problem of evil has been posed as a loving God is incompatible with the circumstances of this world since the time of Hume. But, Marilyn McCord Adams made the excellent point that: "It does the atheologian no good to argue for the falsity of Christianity on the ground that the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient, pleasure-maximizer is incompatible with a world such as ours, because Christians never believed that God was a pleasure-maximizer anyway" (Corduan, 156).

Christian theology must be firmly rooted and wholly based in Biblical revelation. One cannot abstract a specific principle and build from there (a common mistake).

Who is Definitely Saved?

In Old Testament theology those who are the people of God are saved by faith in God. These include the chosen people, converts to the chosen people (i.e. Ruth) and those who helped form the chosen people.

New Testament theology demands personal knowledge of the gospel as a prerequisite to salvation: How can we accept what he does not know?

In addition to knowing the Gospel, one must accept it as true and place trust in the atoning work of Christ.

The New Testament stress the need for missionary work.

The notion of implicit faith in Christ as a way of salvation is oxymoronic. Implicit faith makes as much sense as unfelt pain or inaudible speech.

However, all of these seemingly incoherent expressions are made coherent by mediation. Inaudible speech is made coherent by the usage of sign language. Sign language mediates the speech.

The sacrificial cultus of pre-Christ Jews was the meditation for implicit faith.

Who is Perhaps Saved Before Christ?

In the Old Testament the people of Israel are those who were saved. In the New Testament explicit faith in Christ and his atonement is the criterion for salvation.

To expand either of these criterions require that it is Biblically revealed, not what is merely fair or consistent.

Idolatry, under no circumstances can serve as the mediator in implicit faith. Thus, idolators are not saved.

C.S. Lewis claims that prayers made to false gods in earnest are heard by the true God. But, Lewis cannot substantiate this theory with Biblical evidence.

One argument for idolatry as a mediating device for implicit faith is the relationship of Abram and Melchizedek.

Melchizedek was the priest of El Elyon (God Most Hight) and Abram paid him a tithe for his blessing.

Clark Pinnock makes the claim that El Elyon and YHWH are equivalent. Corduan contends that rather than being equivalent deities, El Elyon and YHWH are identical, two names for the same deity.

This argument (Cordon's) makes sense because Hebrews 7's treatment of Melchizedek as the forerunner of Christ. If Melchizedek were some pagan priest, Hebrews 7 would make no sense.

Melchizedek and others (like Jethro, Moses' father-in-law) are saved by their implicit faith in Christ as mediated by their explicit faith in the God of original monotheism who is identical to the God of Old Testament Israel.

Who is perhaps saved after Christ?

The Jews were no longer saved by being a member of the chosen people because they rejected Christ. Thus, even if Gentiles were worshippers of the original monotheistic God and equivalent to Jews they are no longer saved.

In the New Testament men who worshipped the God of original monotheism were granted the opportunity to have explicit faith in Christ:
1) The Ethiopian Eunuch (Acts 8:26-40)
2) Cornelius, the Roman Centurion (Acts 10)
3) The "God-fearing Greeks" (Acts 17:4)
4) Apollos (Acts 18:24-28)
5) The disciples of John the Baptist (Acts 19:1-6)

"Natural revelation does not save, but it provides the opportunity for the saving message to be sent to those who respond to it" (Corduan, 168).

Thomas Aquinas believed in this, "God will send the message" theory. Robertson McQuilken and Oliver Buswell also advocate this position.

Epistemologically - Is Christianity alone true?
Metaphysically: Do the effects of Christ's atonement extend only to those who believe in Him?

Yes! But, there is a small amount of room for implicit faith in pre-Christ times.

Ethically: Is a human being required to express faith in Christ in order to be eligible for salvation? Yes.

Subjectively: Is an implicit faith in Christ expressed in actions as valid as an explicit faith? Yes, only in pre-Christ times.

Theologically: Does God's saving love extend to those who do not know of Christ? Yes, but only within the further plan of God.

Socially: Are those who never heard of the gospel without hope of salvation? Yes, but God reaches out in the New Testament to those without limited with natural revelation and why would he stop this practice?