Is Jesus Really the Savior

1590 Words Mar 21st, 2014 7 Pages
Nash Chapters 7-11
Is Jesus the Only Savior

Delores Underwood

THEO 313-B02
Dr. Daubert

October 12, 2013

Ronald Nash wrote a book called Is Jesus the Only Savior. It discusses his gathered findings and distinctions between Pluralism and Inclusiveness. This paper will explore some of Ronald Nash’s observations and the arguments, logics and Scripture used to support his writings. This paper will discuss several Religious leaders some pluralist others inclusivists, non-Christians, Christians and their beliefs, philosophies or opinions. In this paper the details of inclusiveness is discussed.
It seems that everyone has a somewhat varied definition of inclusiveness. Nash has in his book that
…show more content…
the benefits of this sacrifice are not confined to those who respond to it with an explicit act of faith” (Nash, 1994, p. 103). Nash breaks down the definitions and uses Scripture to back up his points very well.
Nash uses so many different important people to counter even his own arguments shows his regard for fairness in his writing. Inclusivists say in what they call a two axiom that one is Particularity “The belief about the finality of Jesus must not be watered down and two Universality that God intends his salvation to be for all humans” (Nash, 1994, p. 105). These men who Nash places their expressions in his writings can Nash continues to point out about any religion like on page 115 he speaks about The axiom Universalism, he says that it lacks biblical support. “Sanders says as far as a significant New Testament passage testifying to Christ’s exclusive role as Savior is watered down so that it becomes trivial or unimportant utterance” (Nash, 1994, p. 119). Nash talks a lot about the Scriptures referring to Paul and his letters about salvation.
When it comes to faith or belief Nash says that inclusivists have a different focus. “Inclusivists believe that an act of faith is necessary for salvation, they insist that this faith need not have Jesus as its direct object” (Nash, 1994, p. 123).