There is at least one thing I would say differently, but I do appreciate the distinctions made between dualism, totalitarianism, relativism and pluralism.
Perhaps no one has served as a lightening rod in Evangelical Christianity in recent history as has Brian McLaren, and while I don’t always agree with him, he stimulates me to think. I really would like to hear your thoughts.
Related Posts
a New Kind of Christianity To me, a good non-fiction book, is one that provokes thought. I’m really not interested in reading books that just re-say what I already believe...
D.S. 2007: Part 3 — Everything Must Change So, just a couple days before I left, Brian McLaren’s new book Everything Must Change arrived in the mail. I have to say, that when...
The American Gospel Our last session for this conference is with Brian McLaren…he just put up a slide that I thought I’d share: our contemporary gospel is primarily:...
The way I remember these distinctions from undergrad were exclusivism, inclusivism, and pluralism.
Exclusivism: the understanding that only belief in one God leads to salvation (whatever that is); There is only one path up the mountain.
Inclusivism: There are many paths up the mountain but they all eventually lead to the same place. This is the position of those Christians who believe that if some person from some remote place never heard of Jesus, they may still go to Christian heaven upon their death.
Pluralism: There are many paths up the mountain and they lead to many different places. This is often misunderstood (and misrepresented) as a kind of relativism (or a multiculturalism, which is the same thing) but a Christian pluralist believes whole heartily in her own faith tradition and it gives her life meaning. Yet, she recognizes that said tradition may not be life giving to everyone, and accepts other’s traditions as legitimate.
For Christians to take the later position there often needs to be a re-working or re-reading of evangelism and of soteriology and eschatology more generally. That is, if the purpose of the Christian life is to “win souls” than the end very much matters and a pluralistic option is not available. However, pluralism becomes an option when salvation becomes more a materialistic aspiration (not materialism in the sense of accumulating material possessions but rather the opposite side of the Cartesian duality). In which case, the purpose is the process; eschatology becomes something of a praxes—a working towards the Kingdom instead of waiting for it. When this happens concerns like social, economic, and ecological justice become deeply rooted in ones’ faith.
Twitter Updates
Charlie,
The way I remember these distinctions from undergrad were exclusivism, inclusivism, and pluralism.
Exclusivism: the understanding that only belief in one God leads to salvation (whatever that is); There is only one path up the mountain.
Inclusivism: There are many paths up the mountain but they all eventually lead to the same place. This is the position of those Christians who believe that if some person from some remote place never heard of Jesus, they may still go to Christian heaven upon their death.
Pluralism: There are many paths up the mountain and they lead to many different places. This is often misunderstood (and misrepresented) as a kind of relativism (or a multiculturalism, which is the same thing) but a Christian pluralist believes whole heartily in her own faith tradition and it gives her life meaning. Yet, she recognizes that said tradition may not be life giving to everyone, and accepts other’s traditions as legitimate.
For Christians to take the later position there often needs to be a re-working or re-reading of evangelism and of soteriology and eschatology more generally. That is, if the purpose of the Christian life is to “win souls” than the end very much matters and a pluralistic option is not available. However, pluralism becomes an option when salvation becomes more a materialistic aspiration (not materialism in the sense of accumulating material possessions but rather the opposite side of the Cartesian duality). In which case, the purpose is the process; eschatology becomes something of a praxes—a working towards the Kingdom instead of waiting for it. When this happens concerns like social, economic, and ecological justice become deeply rooted in ones’ faith.