The Single Path
The inclusivist exclusionism of Jesus Christ
In Acts 4:12, Peter declares:
Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to humankind by which we must be saved.’
What name is this? The name of Jesus of Nazareth, the crucified and risen Christ. It is not a tribal claim, note. Salvation is not just for Israel, it is for all humanity.
This salvation only knows a single path. It is not a destination with many alternative routes. As Jesus himself said: I am the way, the truth, and the life: no-one comes to the Father but by me.
It might be nice to imagine that there are many paths to the one God, but it simply wouldn’t be true. At its heart, Peter’s claim is a claim about effectiveness. He is a witness to the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. He stands to testify to that power.
Our human situation knows of only one effective remedy: the name of Jesus Christ. He saves, and no one else does.
But how is the claim not simply borne of prejudice and arrogance?
Here are three reasons that this isn’t prejudiced.
The first is because to say that only Christ works is not a statement of arrogance but a statement of humility. It is a claim that tells me that I am spiritually and morally unhealthy, and so it makes me humble. It doesn’t tell me I am better than anyone else, or that I can lift my game if I just get my values straight. Christ doesn’t come to bring me moral guidance to a better life, but forgiveness and rebirth. Which means I can only claim him as Saviour from a position of utter humility.
The second reason is that Jesus Christ is the man who rose from the dead. That makes him very different from all the other great religious teachers. It makes Christianity very easy to evaluate. As Paul says, if Christ is not risen, we are all still in our sins, we are not saved, and we can all just move on. But if Christ is risen, then there is no other name by which men and women may be saved. This, too, is a humbling truth: it isn’t constructed by the holy or the clever. It is announced by “uneducated and ordinary men”, as Peter and John were.
Third, because it’s an inclusive message, not a message of exclusion and division. It’s a message for all human beings of whatever background, ethnicity, gender, or sexuality or whatever human identity we include in the list. The offer of salvation is universal in scope. Jesus Christ is not the property of one nation or tribe: he transcends all of those. The gospel destroys the proud assumption that my people are better than your people. It requires the humility to stand on a completely level playing field with all of humanity, stripping away any prejudice or cultural superiority.
Indeed, when Christ is worshipped as a tribal deity, it is not Christ that is worshipped. It is a blasphemy against the real Christ.
Yep, in my experience there are various ways to Jesus, with Jesus the Christ being the way to God
A few thoughts, Michael. You mention a single path, but how might this single path be taken by someone who has never heard of Jesus (because they pre-dated Jesus or because they know little to nothing about Jesus)? Might not their path be different to someone who has good knowledge of Jesus? A second question: what of someone who has reasonable doubts that Jesus said those words from John about him being the exclusive path to the Father and who also doubts that the words in Acts were Peter's rather than being authored by the unknown author of Acts. The way you have set up this exclusive pathway can be challenged as unreasonable on epistemological grounds. Are people with reasonable doubts damned for not believing what can be reasonably doubted?