A Newbiginday #2

Newbigin getting deep re: inter-religious dialogue and perhaps more controversially (yet apropos) salvation.  Keep in mind this discussion was in 1989 - so one might claim a limited perspective of the 'main world religions' from our point of view.

Précis of Lesslie Newbigin, “The Gospel and the Religions,” in The Gospel in a Pluralist

            Society, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1989), 171-183.

            ‘Religion’ covers a wide variety of entities.  The main world religions can be divided into historical revelation: Judaism; Christianity; Islam, and a-historical revelation: Hinduism; Jainism; Sikhism; Buddhism.  Worldviews are atomic: human individual is ultimate, oceanic: all things merge to one, and relational: meaning in relationships.  The Bible has a relational view.  Religion can also mislead as it excludes secular binding commitments or life principles (171-173).  Scripture does not hold us to a strictly exclusivist view of eternal damnation outside of accepting Jesus.  This view forces creation of barriers and judgments regarding salvation which are for God only to make.  The Inclusivist view (as per Rahner) claims Christ as saviour but acknowledges that this saving can happen outside the church to individuals and religions un-confronted by the gospel reality: “anonymous Christians.”  There are those who attack people unwilling to make a judgment as to whether other religions can save because there is a need for a basis to pray together for world peace (174-175).

            The Christian approach to world religions must be developed as follows: 1) The reality of God as an ocean of love overflowing has meant all people are witness to God’s grace, 2) The revelation of Jesus compels acknowledgement that the world is in sinful rebellion, 3) Everything is held in tension between these two poles: sin and grace - both universalism and exclusivity remove the tension and disable dialogue, 4) “What happens to the non-Christian after death?” cannot be the primary question: a) God alone has the right to answer it (we see this in Jesus’ response to Peter after the rich young man), b) the question abstracts the human soul away from the entirety of the person, leaving no room for the role that is played in the present reality in light of the end of God’s story, c) this question makes the ultimate concern an individual concern and not the glory of God (176-180).  This approach to religion creates four implications: 1) we see the grace of God at work in the lives of those who do not know Jesus as Lord is an implication of God’s greatness, 2) we will cooperate with other religions on projects which move toward the Christian understanding of the end of history, 3) we create context for dialogue with others over the meaning of history, 4) the Christian contribution in the dialogue is to tell the story which God has given to us to tell.  The view developed is therefore exclusivist as Jesus Christ is the unique key, inclusivist as God works his grace as he wills, and pluralist in that God’s grace works in all lives (180-183).