Is Jesus The Only Savior?

761 Words 4 Pages
Introduction
Ronald Nash’s book Is Jesus the Only Savior? seeks to explain or shed light on this question that has puzzled many in previous generations as well as ours. The resounding answer that comes forth from his arguments is “yes,” Jesus is the only savior of humankind. He starts by taking into account the three schools of thought associated with this controversial question. These are Pluralism, Inclusivism, and Exclusivism. The first six chapters of the book deals with Pluralism, which can be said to be the belief that all major world religions are equal and there is no religion that is superior to the other. Pluralism also emphasizes that all these religions lead to salvation and to God. In the last five chapters of the book, Nash
…show more content…
These relationships exhibited an intimacy with God that is not seen in the New Testament. One example was Enoch; he was said to have walked with God until he was no more. Because of this, Inclusivists argue that salvation must have been available for the Old Testament saints as well, even if Christ came after them. They go against the Excluvisist belief that only those that received Christ in their hearts through a prayer of faith would receive eternal life.
2) The Unevangelised
Nash expresses the Inclusivist argument that even after the coming of Christ, there were people living in faraway lands like Africa and America who were not able to be reached by the gospel before they died. The gospel took many years to spread to the whole world, and even today, there are people who have not heard it yet. These people have their own understanding of who God is, and they worship him in their own way. Thus, inclusivists argue that it is not the fault of such people not to hear the word of God. Therefore, with God being a just God, they will be preserved a place in heaven, even if they did not accept Christ.
Weaknesses
1) One of the weaknesses that Nash had was that he failed to recognize an opportunity to state or mention that there is a fair precedent for Covenant children who perish in infancy to be indeed, saved believers.
2) The Arminian and Inclusivist position of