Christian Exclusion

Photo by Wyron A

“I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (Jesus in John 14:6 NRSV).

“I warned Jews and Greeks to change the way they think and act and to believe in our Lord Jesus” (Paul in Acts 20:21 GWT).

“Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved” (Peter in Acts 4:12 NIV).

Interfaith dialogue, when done right, seeks to better understand other religious traditions and their adherents. It may also serve as a basis to discover some common ground and establish healthy relationships between such disparate religious groups.

Interfaith dialogue done wrong seeks to downplay or even ignore irreconcilable assertions made by these respective religions.

Religious inclusion, when done right, seeks mutual respect and cooperation in society among people of differing religious commitments. It may also indicate an invitation for those on the outside of a tradition to learn more about it and perhaps to even join the group should such individuals choose to do so.

Religious inclusion done wrong seeks to remove boundaries that define a particular religious tradition with the intent of making it more desirable and accommodating to would-be participants.       

For Christians who stand in the historic tradition of the movement, it is believed that Jesus of Nazareth is the true Lord and only savior of the world, the single means through which people may properly relate to God. Moreover, Christians understand that acceptance of Jesus as Lord and Savior means that persons must actively turn away from any actions or attitudes that the Bible declares to be contrary to God’s intentions for humankind.

Accordingly, Christianity makes claims that necessarily exclude many ideas and practices, along with those who continue to hold to them. Said somewhat differently, while Christianity is open to all people, because its central tenets apply to all people, it cannot simply include all people to the extent that they refuse to change the way they think and act in conformity with the tradition.     

Clearly, this sort of exclusion has been deemed offensive to many, even among those who claim the Christian tradition as their own. And this, in turn, has motivated some Christian groups to actively work toward softening the boundaries of the tradition in order to make themselves more inclusive of others.

For example, the language of “love” is often employed to justify the inclusion of people who do not believe fundamental Christian teachings and/or refuse to conform to some or more of the ethical requirements of the Christian life put forward in Scripture. It may be charged that since Jesus’s message was one of love, and because God is love, it is incumbent upon the people of God and followers of Jesus to extend love by affirming people in terms of their own self-understanding, regardless of whether it conflicts with the greater Christian tradition.

But the Jesus who did not condemn a woman caught in adultery, also unambiguously told her to “go and sin no more” (John 8:11). And the Jesus who did not come “to condemn the world,” also declared that those who reject him and his teaching stand “condemned already” (John 3:16–21; compare John 14:8–24). Ultimately, can it be genuinely loving within a Christian worldview to affirm things that people may do or believe when such convictions and behaviors are contrary to God’s will and thereby a cause of harm?

There are, of course, other maneuvers undertaken by some Christian groups to make Christianity more agreeable with cultural sensibilities that run counter to its claims and the pluralistic world in which we live. In my view, the appropriate response to such efforts should never be a “fear-mongering” that inspires other Christians to be immediately suspect and hostile toward any sort of Christian teaching that appears foreign to what they have been previously taught. Promoting knee-jerk reactions to the unfamiliar is a sure way to squelch Christian maturity.

However, I would also contend that the correct response should neither be “tip-toeing” around ideas that prove to be patently out-of-step with the historic Christian tradition. Calling a spade a spade by means of reasoned and informed expression is an equally important aspect of Christian maturity.

The reality is that historic Christianity will never be palatable for a good number of people. That was the case when it began, and it will continue to be so until the Lord’s return. Indeed, as the apostle Paul pointed out some 2,000 years ago,

“[W]e proclaim Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For God’s foolishness is wiser than human wisdom, and God’s weakness is stronger than human strength” (1 Corinthians 1:23–25 NRSV).