Lesson 11- Jesus The Only Way?

Matt Wood

Apologetics- Defending Your Faith • Sermon • Submitted 3 years ago

John 14:6

Exclusivism

Jesus

0 ratings

· 7 views

Today we examine an all important question “Is Jesus the only way?”

Notes

Transcript

Handout

John 14:6 (KJV): Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Acts 4:12 (KJV): Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

Today we will examine one of the most difficult claims of Christianity, that Jesus is the only way to God.

In our modern day pluralistic society, most people do not have a problem with adding Jesus alongside a variety of other options to be considered, but there is a great deal of opposition and even animosity when we begin to make the claim that Jesus is the only way to God.

Yet if Jesus is who He claimed to be it becomes apparent that this is exactly the claim that He made regarding Himself and that His followers made concerning Him.

New Testament Teaching

The New Testament writers clearly communicate, over and over again that Jesus is the only way to God.

Ephesians 2:11-13- Paul writes to the Gentile believers in Ephesus regarding their state before they came to know Christ.

It was not as though these Gentile converts had no religious affiliation before Christ, but the gods they formerly worshipped, Paul considered to be false gods that were not to be associated with the true and living God.

The opening chapters of the book of Romans provides a great deal of insight into the general condition of humanity.

We find that God has revealed Himself to all mankind such that man is ”without excuse.” (Romans 1:19-20)

We also find that God has implanted His moral law into the hearts of all men. (Romans 2:14-15)

The sad reality is that mankind has generally rejected God and His law. (Romans 1:21-25 & Romans 3:9-12)

This leaves men in a hopeless condition described in Romans 3:19-20

Yet God has provided a means whereby we can be saved and restored from this hopeless condition through faith in Jesus Christ. (Romans 3:21-31)

The New Testament is clear regarding the universality of sin and the uniqueness of Christ’s atoning death making the assertion that there is no salvation apart from Christ.

In fact the primary reason that the early church faced such tremendous persecution was because they continually confronted false religion and would not compromise on the exclusivity of Christ as the only way of salvation refusing to embrace a pluralistic view.

The Demise of the Doctrine

As Christianity grew there came a time when the doctrine of the exclusivity of Christ was embraced by much of western civilization.

Then in the time between 1450 and 1750 there was a great deal of exploration done by men like Marco Polo, Christopher Columbus, and Ferdinand Magellan.

This led to the discovery of new civilizations and whole new regions of the world that knew nothing of the Christian faith.

The discovery of these new lands impacted the claims of Christianity as it was recognized that Christianity was not as universal as was once believed and that in fact each culture seemed to have its own religion and its own god or gods.

It also caused many to conclude that Christianity’s claim to be the only way of salvation was narrow and cruel since there were millions in the world without knowledge of Christ.

Voltaire, and atheist philosopher, taunted the Christians of his day with the prospect of millions of Chinese doomed to hell for not having believed in Christ, when they had not so much as even heard of Christ.

As a result we have once again seen the rise of a pluralistic perspective which suggests that there are many ways to God.

So the question then becomes: “Is there only one way to God, or are there a multitude of paths which ultimately lead to the same destination?”

Pluralist Arguments

It’s arrogant and immoral to hold to any kind of religious particularism because you then have to regard everybody who disagrees with you as mistaken. Therefore, religious particularism is false.

This is a textbook example of the logical fallacy known as argument ad hominem which tries to invalidate a position by attacking the character of those who hold it.

This is a fallacy because the truth of a position is entirely independent of the moral character of those who believe it.

Furthermore it is not necessary for a person to be arrogant or immoral to hold a particularist viewpoint. In fact, many believers have simply sought the truth and through much study and prayer have concluded that Christianity is true and have as a result humbly embraced the Christian faith.

This objection is fundamentally a double-edged sword for the pluralist because he asserts that his perspective is right and that those who hold a particularist view are mistaken.

Religious beliefs are culturally relative and are nothing more than the product of the place of a person’s birth.

Example: “If you had been born in Pakistan, you would likely have been a Muslim. Therefor your belief in Christianity is false or unjustified.”

This is a textbook example of the “genetic fallacy.” Trying to invalidate a position by criticizing the way a person came to hold the position.

The fact that your beliefs depend upon where and when you were born has no relevance to the truth of those beliefs.

Example: If you had been born in ancient Greece you would probably have believed that the sun orbits the Earth. Does that imply that your belief that the Earth orbits the sun is false or unjustified?

Again the argument is self-defeating, for if the religious pluralist had been born in Pakistan, he would likely have been a religious particularist.

The Real Problem

The real problem concerns the fate of unbelievers outside of one’s own particular religious tradition. Christian particularism consigns such persons to hell, which pluralists take to be unconscionable.

Is the problem hell? Many cannot reconcile the love of God with the fact that it seems there are so many who are on their way to hell.

From scripture we can see that it is clearly God’s desire that all men should be saved.

2 Peter 3:9 (KJV): The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

1 Timothy 2:4 (KJV): Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

In reality, God does not send anyone to hell, but those who are there have made a conscious choice to reject God’s revelation and have thus sealed their fate in spite of God’s offer of salvation.

Is the problem that the punishment does not fit the crime? Some suggest that eternal punishment is to great a penalty for the sins men have committed.

This may be true if only sins like lying, cheating, and murder are considered.

Yet these are not ultimately the sins which condemn men to hell. The sin which brings eternal condemnation is the sin of unbelief.

Men are condemned to eternal torment because they reject God and refuse His provision for their salvation in Jesus Christ thus eternal condemnation is warranted.

Illustration- Satan encased in chest high ice flapping his winds to rise to the heighTVs of heaven to be equal to God. If he would but humble himself and stop flapping the ice would melt and he would be free.

Is the problem lack of information? Some suppose that a loving god wouldn’t send people to hell because they were uninformed or misinformed about Christ. People who haven’t heard of Christ or have been given a distorted picture of Christ can’t be expected to place their faith in Christ.

Romans 1:20 KJV 1900

For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

No one can be saved apart from Christ for even the Old Testament saints who believed ultimately were saved by Christ, even though they did not have direct knowledge of Him.

God’s existence and power are generally revealed in nature, and his fundamental moral law is instinctively grasped by persons everywhere at all times. God specially reveals Himself to specific people at certain times through His Word and supremely through Jesus Christ.

The question then arises “How will God judge those who have experienced His general revelation in nature and conscience but have not known His special revelation?

One thing is certain based upon the Word of God and that is that salvation is universally accessible such that all men could be saved even though it is true that not all men will be saved.

God is just and His justice would not allow the unjust condemnation of persons who are uninformed or misinformed about Christ. So the real problem cannot be lack of information.

Acts 10- the case of Cornelius

The Heart of the Problem

If God is all-knowing, then He knew who would freely receive the gospel and who would not. But then certain questions arise:

Why didn‘t God bring the gospel to people who He knew would accept it if they heard it, even though they reject the light of general revelation that they do have? Would and all-loving God allow people’s eternal destiny to hinge upon historical and geographical accident?

Why did God even create the world when He knew that so many people would not believe the gospel and be lost? Since creation is a free act of God, why not simply refrain from creating any free creatures at all?

Why didn’t God create a world in which everyone freely believes the gospel and is saved?

The Problem Analyzed

The structure of the problem seems to be that the following statements are supposedly logically inconsistent:

God is all-powerful and all-loving.

Some people never hear the gospel and are lost.

On the surface there is no logical contradiction between these two statements but there seem to be hidden premises which are assumed to make them so. These are that:

If God is all-powerful, He can create a world in which everybody hears the gospel and is freely saved.

If God is all-loving, He prefers a world in which everybody hears the gospel and is freely saved.

Consider 3: It seems uncontroversial that God could create a world in which everybody hears the gospel. But so long as people are free, there is no guarantee that everybody in such a world would be freely saved.

It is logically impossible to make someone freely do something. Being all-powerful does not mean have the ability to do the logically impossible.

This shows that premise 3 is not necessarily true because for all we know, in any world of free people that God could create, some people would freely reject His saving grace and be lost.

Consider 4: If such a world were possible, should we assume that this world is the one that God would prefer?

Could it be that such a world would have other overriding deficiencies that make them less preferable?

Suppose that in order for a world to exist where everyone would be saved it would have to be sparsely populated such that there were only a few people for if more were created some would reject the gospel.

Would it be wrong or inconsistent with His love for God to prefer a more populous world where thousands or millions are saved even though many would also reject Him and be lost?

There is No Inconsistency

We can show positively that it’s entirely possible that God is all-powerful and all-loving and that many persons never hear the gospel and are lost.

As a good and loving God we should assume that God wants as many people as possible to be saved and as few as possible to be lost.

His goal then is to achieve the optimal balance between the two.

It is possible that in order to achieve a multitude of saints, God had to accept a multitude of sinners.

Some object that an all-loving God would not create people who He knew will be lost, but who would have been saved if only they had heard the gospel. But how do we know there are any such persons?

It is possible that God has so providentially ordered the world that those who never hear the gospel are precisely those who would not have believed if they had heard it.

Now we submit a 5th premise:

God has created a world that has an optimal balance between saved and lost, and those who never hear the gospel and are lost would not have received it even if they had heard it.

Review

Question: Why didn’t God create a world in which everyone freely believes the gospel and is saved?

Answer: It may not be feasible for God to create such a world for it would infringe upon the free will of man to receive or reject Him.

Question: Why did God even create the world when He knew that so many people would not believe the gospel and would be lost?

Answer: God wanted to share His love and fellowship with created persons. He knew that meant that many would freely reject Him and be lost, but He also knew that many others would freely receive His grace and be saved.

Question: Why didn‘t God bring the gospel to people who He knew would accept it if they heard it, even though they reject the light of general revelation?

Answer: It is entirely possible that there are no such people. It may be that God in His providence has so arranged the world that those who would respond to the gospel if they heard it, do hear it.

Acts 17:24-28- These answers are entirely compatible with what we do know based upon the scriptures.

Related Media

Related Sermons