Year 2 Notes Christianity
1. Religious pluralism and Theology
Is Christianity the only true religion, and is salvation possible for people who are not Christians?
Writer Alan race identifies three perspectives within the theology of religion, known as exclusivism,
inclusivism, and pluralism.
A) exclusivism - the idea that people must have explicit faith in Jesus as the son of God, and salvation
can only be found in Jesus.
⁃ Argue that Jesus’ sacrificial death on the cross and resurrection were real events of cosmic
significance for all humanity.
⁃ Some exclusivist believe that truth can be found in other religious traditions, but not enough
for salvation.
⁃ Some people prefer the term ‘particularist’, as it has less negative connotations.
⁃ Including the rite of baptism - cleansed of sin and born as a Christian
⁃ No other path or religion is available
⁃ ‘Narrow exclusivism’ - only Christians within their own denomination can be saved. Some
who take the bible liberally, believe that more liberal Christians are not going to be saved.
The Catholic Church before Vatican II taught that there was no salvation outside the
Catholic Church.
⁃ Broad exclusivism - all who accept Christ though faith is saved, whatever their denomination
and style of worship.
⁃ Bible - Jesus said ‘I am the way and the truth and the life’
Gavin D’Costa distinguishes between two different kinds of theological exclusivism = restrictive
access exclusivism and universal access exclusivism
RAE - place emphasis on sinfulness of human nature and uniqueness of Christ as only means of
salvation (sola Christus). Salvation is on possible for those hearing the Gospel and accepting baptism
into the Church. Augustine and Calvin argue that God saves only those whom he has chosen.
UAE - Christs salvation is offered to all and the will of God is that everyone should to him through
faith in Christ
⁃ Hendrik Kraemer - an exclusivist, who argued salvation is only for Christians, although gods’
revelation can be seen outside the Christian faith by people. He argued either a religion
accepts the salvation offered by Christ or it does not - religions need to be understood as a
whole and it does not make sense to say some aspects of a religion is true.
⁃ Karl Barth - an exclusivist, knowledge of God can only be found when God chooses to reveal
himself through his Word. In Barth’s view, Jesus was the living Word of God, and the Bible is
the word of God as a witness to the truth of God in Christ.
Criticisms
⁃ Not compatible with the idea of an all loving and forgiving God. It suggests that God loves
some people more than others, because some people have much more opportunities to
become Christian than others.
⁃ Exclusivism causes social division and conflict - it may impact social cohesion in society.
⁃ It fails to recognise the richness and wisdom of different world religions
⁃ It is arrogant in its assumptions that Christians know best
, ⁃ Fails to answer what happens to people that simply were around before Christ or did not
hear about Christ (Calvin would say we all have this innate knowing of God, so there is no
excuse)
⁃ Nature of God cannot be fully understood by humans (He is infinite, we are finite) Therefore
it is impossible to say that anyone can have full control of truth.
⁃ RESPONSE: Exclusivism gives a reason for believing in Christianity. Both inclusivism and
pluralism undermine the notion of unique truths claims by suggesting other religions may
also share these truth claims.
B) Inclusivism - tend to argue that Christianity is the best route/ normative way, but there is
possibility for salvation outside of Christian tradition.
⁃ They agree Jesus’ death and resurrection were unique events of cosmic significance for
salvation, they do not agree a loving God would reject someone who was sincerely trying to
follow God through the context of a different religious faith.
⁃ Some believe it might be possible after death for nonChristians to accept the truth of the
Christian message.
⁃ Perhaps true is found in other religions - it is the Christian truth even though it has not been
recognised as such. Other religions sometimes have ‘rays of truth’ or ‘rays of light’ where
they agree with Christian teachings.
⁃ COUNTER = Hendrik Kraemer - either a religion accepts the salvation offered by Christ or it
does not - religions need to be understood as a whole and it does not make sense to say
some aspects of a religion is true.
⁃ Perhaps other religions call Christ by other names without realising it
⁃ Karl Rahner - catholic theologian, was very influential in developing this = Christianity is the
absolute religion, but some people through no fault of their own, are not exposed to the
message of Christianity, lived before Jesus. People can be ‘anonymous Christians’, following
Christian ideals without realising. So, people may achieve eternal salvation if they seek God
with a sincere heart in contexts other than Christianity.
⁃ However, once you hear about Christianity, you must accept it.
⁃ This may be supported by the parable of the sheep and the Goat
Criticism of inclusivism
⁃ The Christian message is diluted is there is the suggestion that Christ need not be necessary
for salvation. If grace can be acquired without the sacraments like confession and Eucharist,
is there any need for the Church?
⁃ Hans Urs von Balthasar argues the Church should not go into hiding in the secular world
with a watered-down Christian message in order to appease people of other faiths or no
faith at all. It should be courageous in its claim salvation is found in Jesus Christ alone.
⁃ Inclusivism is still arrogant, stating that Christian belief is the best and putting itself as the
judge/ measure of other faiths (how else could we do this?)
⁃ People who have made free choices to have beliefs that are Christian should not be called
‘anonymous Christians’ - if they wanted to be Christians, they would be (what about those
who haven’t heard of Christianity, but demonstrate values)
C) Pluralism
⁃ Argues many different religions have the potential to lead their followers to salvation and
that truth is not exclusive to one particular one
⁃ Different religions share the same goals, even if they disagree on details of doctrine and
practice (as these are human constructs - attempting to find ways to respond to God or the
divine or the ‘Real’).
⁃ No need for members of one religion to try to convert others to share their beliefs
, ⁃ Elephant at the blind men analogy
John Hick - a pluralist and a universalist - God of love would not deny salvation to people just
because they happened to be born in a non-Christian culture or happened to have chosen a religious
tradition other than Christianity through which to seek God.
- God wills universal salvation - everyone will be saved, continuing their spiritual journeys
towards God after death.
- He argued for a ‘Copernican revolution’ in theology, removing Christianity from the centre
of the universe and replacing it with God or the real. All religions, he thought, revolves
around the Real.
Used Kant’s distinction between the noumenal and phenomenal - noumenal is as it really is, and
phenomenal is as it appears to be, as we see it through the filter of our limited human
understanding. Religions are human, phenomenal attempt to uncover the noumenal.
All religions are therefore flawed and limited - no one can claim anything right (this seems a bit
pessimistic). Jesus incarnate may be claimed as a myth.
- This may be supported by the parable of the sheep and the goats.
Raimon Panikkar - emphasised the mystery of the divine, and need for openness to truth wherever
it may be found. He thought that God makes himself known in a variety of ways and cultural
contexts, and that there is a need for people to understand God can reveal himself in whatever way
he chooses. He saw spiritualism as a spiritual attitude rather than a reasoned philosophical
perspective.
Criticisms of pluralism
⁃ A pluralist approach to theology is not a Christian approach - it rejects the idea that Christ
came into the world to save humanity once and for all from sin; this is the central message
of Christianity.
⁃ It can take human ideas of fairness and imagine what God ought to do to make salvation
fair - this is no less arrogant than the other perspectives. God is free to save whoever he
wants, and it not confined to behaving how humans think God would.
⁃ Self-contradictory as it imposes the pluralist view as the right view, suggesting other
approaches are wrong. Hick contradicts himself by making truth claims about religion when
he claims no religion is able to make truth claims and can see things as they really are. Hick
claims human religion belong in the phenomenal sphere and are unable to see things as they
really are, but then proceeds to tell us how things really are when he argues that all religions
essentially lead to the same end goal. It is as though he is claiming insight of a ‘bird’s-eye
view’ kind which is hidden from everyone else.
⁃ Scholars like Barth would argue that the Bible contains God’s revelation, and this can be
trusted more than Hick’s assessment of reality.
‘The best responses Christians can make to living in a multi faith society is to take an inclusivity
approach’. Discuss.
Yes - strengths of inclusivism - social cohesion, more inclusive, still holds true key principles of
Christianity
No - say true to yourself and religion – criticisms of exclusivism.
exclusivist standpoint (church should not dilute itself for the sake of others/ present a watered-down
version).
No - we should believe all religions are the path. Criticism = renders Jesus’ sacrifice as unnecessary.
Conclude = agree with the inclusivity standpoint.
‘Exclusivism is the best approach to theology’. Discuss
1. Religious pluralism and Theology
Is Christianity the only true religion, and is salvation possible for people who are not Christians?
Writer Alan race identifies three perspectives within the theology of religion, known as exclusivism,
inclusivism, and pluralism.
A) exclusivism - the idea that people must have explicit faith in Jesus as the son of God, and salvation
can only be found in Jesus.
⁃ Argue that Jesus’ sacrificial death on the cross and resurrection were real events of cosmic
significance for all humanity.
⁃ Some exclusivist believe that truth can be found in other religious traditions, but not enough
for salvation.
⁃ Some people prefer the term ‘particularist’, as it has less negative connotations.
⁃ Including the rite of baptism - cleansed of sin and born as a Christian
⁃ No other path or religion is available
⁃ ‘Narrow exclusivism’ - only Christians within their own denomination can be saved. Some
who take the bible liberally, believe that more liberal Christians are not going to be saved.
The Catholic Church before Vatican II taught that there was no salvation outside the
Catholic Church.
⁃ Broad exclusivism - all who accept Christ though faith is saved, whatever their denomination
and style of worship.
⁃ Bible - Jesus said ‘I am the way and the truth and the life’
Gavin D’Costa distinguishes between two different kinds of theological exclusivism = restrictive
access exclusivism and universal access exclusivism
RAE - place emphasis on sinfulness of human nature and uniqueness of Christ as only means of
salvation (sola Christus). Salvation is on possible for those hearing the Gospel and accepting baptism
into the Church. Augustine and Calvin argue that God saves only those whom he has chosen.
UAE - Christs salvation is offered to all and the will of God is that everyone should to him through
faith in Christ
⁃ Hendrik Kraemer - an exclusivist, who argued salvation is only for Christians, although gods’
revelation can be seen outside the Christian faith by people. He argued either a religion
accepts the salvation offered by Christ or it does not - religions need to be understood as a
whole and it does not make sense to say some aspects of a religion is true.
⁃ Karl Barth - an exclusivist, knowledge of God can only be found when God chooses to reveal
himself through his Word. In Barth’s view, Jesus was the living Word of God, and the Bible is
the word of God as a witness to the truth of God in Christ.
Criticisms
⁃ Not compatible with the idea of an all loving and forgiving God. It suggests that God loves
some people more than others, because some people have much more opportunities to
become Christian than others.
⁃ Exclusivism causes social division and conflict - it may impact social cohesion in society.
⁃ It fails to recognise the richness and wisdom of different world religions
⁃ It is arrogant in its assumptions that Christians know best
, ⁃ Fails to answer what happens to people that simply were around before Christ or did not
hear about Christ (Calvin would say we all have this innate knowing of God, so there is no
excuse)
⁃ Nature of God cannot be fully understood by humans (He is infinite, we are finite) Therefore
it is impossible to say that anyone can have full control of truth.
⁃ RESPONSE: Exclusivism gives a reason for believing in Christianity. Both inclusivism and
pluralism undermine the notion of unique truths claims by suggesting other religions may
also share these truth claims.
B) Inclusivism - tend to argue that Christianity is the best route/ normative way, but there is
possibility for salvation outside of Christian tradition.
⁃ They agree Jesus’ death and resurrection were unique events of cosmic significance for
salvation, they do not agree a loving God would reject someone who was sincerely trying to
follow God through the context of a different religious faith.
⁃ Some believe it might be possible after death for nonChristians to accept the truth of the
Christian message.
⁃ Perhaps true is found in other religions - it is the Christian truth even though it has not been
recognised as such. Other religions sometimes have ‘rays of truth’ or ‘rays of light’ where
they agree with Christian teachings.
⁃ COUNTER = Hendrik Kraemer - either a religion accepts the salvation offered by Christ or it
does not - religions need to be understood as a whole and it does not make sense to say
some aspects of a religion is true.
⁃ Perhaps other religions call Christ by other names without realising it
⁃ Karl Rahner - catholic theologian, was very influential in developing this = Christianity is the
absolute religion, but some people through no fault of their own, are not exposed to the
message of Christianity, lived before Jesus. People can be ‘anonymous Christians’, following
Christian ideals without realising. So, people may achieve eternal salvation if they seek God
with a sincere heart in contexts other than Christianity.
⁃ However, once you hear about Christianity, you must accept it.
⁃ This may be supported by the parable of the sheep and the Goat
Criticism of inclusivism
⁃ The Christian message is diluted is there is the suggestion that Christ need not be necessary
for salvation. If grace can be acquired without the sacraments like confession and Eucharist,
is there any need for the Church?
⁃ Hans Urs von Balthasar argues the Church should not go into hiding in the secular world
with a watered-down Christian message in order to appease people of other faiths or no
faith at all. It should be courageous in its claim salvation is found in Jesus Christ alone.
⁃ Inclusivism is still arrogant, stating that Christian belief is the best and putting itself as the
judge/ measure of other faiths (how else could we do this?)
⁃ People who have made free choices to have beliefs that are Christian should not be called
‘anonymous Christians’ - if they wanted to be Christians, they would be (what about those
who haven’t heard of Christianity, but demonstrate values)
C) Pluralism
⁃ Argues many different religions have the potential to lead their followers to salvation and
that truth is not exclusive to one particular one
⁃ Different religions share the same goals, even if they disagree on details of doctrine and
practice (as these are human constructs - attempting to find ways to respond to God or the
divine or the ‘Real’).
⁃ No need for members of one religion to try to convert others to share their beliefs
, ⁃ Elephant at the blind men analogy
John Hick - a pluralist and a universalist - God of love would not deny salvation to people just
because they happened to be born in a non-Christian culture or happened to have chosen a religious
tradition other than Christianity through which to seek God.
- God wills universal salvation - everyone will be saved, continuing their spiritual journeys
towards God after death.
- He argued for a ‘Copernican revolution’ in theology, removing Christianity from the centre
of the universe and replacing it with God or the real. All religions, he thought, revolves
around the Real.
Used Kant’s distinction between the noumenal and phenomenal - noumenal is as it really is, and
phenomenal is as it appears to be, as we see it through the filter of our limited human
understanding. Religions are human, phenomenal attempt to uncover the noumenal.
All religions are therefore flawed and limited - no one can claim anything right (this seems a bit
pessimistic). Jesus incarnate may be claimed as a myth.
- This may be supported by the parable of the sheep and the goats.
Raimon Panikkar - emphasised the mystery of the divine, and need for openness to truth wherever
it may be found. He thought that God makes himself known in a variety of ways and cultural
contexts, and that there is a need for people to understand God can reveal himself in whatever way
he chooses. He saw spiritualism as a spiritual attitude rather than a reasoned philosophical
perspective.
Criticisms of pluralism
⁃ A pluralist approach to theology is not a Christian approach - it rejects the idea that Christ
came into the world to save humanity once and for all from sin; this is the central message
of Christianity.
⁃ It can take human ideas of fairness and imagine what God ought to do to make salvation
fair - this is no less arrogant than the other perspectives. God is free to save whoever he
wants, and it not confined to behaving how humans think God would.
⁃ Self-contradictory as it imposes the pluralist view as the right view, suggesting other
approaches are wrong. Hick contradicts himself by making truth claims about religion when
he claims no religion is able to make truth claims and can see things as they really are. Hick
claims human religion belong in the phenomenal sphere and are unable to see things as they
really are, but then proceeds to tell us how things really are when he argues that all religions
essentially lead to the same end goal. It is as though he is claiming insight of a ‘bird’s-eye
view’ kind which is hidden from everyone else.
⁃ Scholars like Barth would argue that the Bible contains God’s revelation, and this can be
trusted more than Hick’s assessment of reality.
‘The best responses Christians can make to living in a multi faith society is to take an inclusivity
approach’. Discuss.
Yes - strengths of inclusivism - social cohesion, more inclusive, still holds true key principles of
Christianity
No - say true to yourself and religion – criticisms of exclusivism.
exclusivist standpoint (church should not dilute itself for the sake of others/ present a watered-down
version).
No - we should believe all religions are the path. Criticism = renders Jesus’ sacrifice as unnecessary.
Conclude = agree with the inclusivity standpoint.
‘Exclusivism is the best approach to theology’. Discuss
