Why Inclusivism Underminds And Negates The Gospel

                                                            By Joel Sexton

Inclusivism comes in many forms. And suggests that at least some of mankind will be saved without having believed the Gospel. There are two main branches of inclusivism. First, the one extreme being Universalism. But since Classic Universalism (not the new age universalism spawned by Full Preterist's and others) states that one must have faith to be saved. Albeit this is a post-mortem faith being exercised.

But the more widely accepted form among evangelicalism is the idea that those that openly reject the gospel will be lost but those who basically lived good lives and haven't had the opportunity to the hear the gospel will be saved anyways. A free pass. This is just as heinous as Universalism since it negates the very gospel message they claim to preach.

To assert that one can be saved without believing the gospel underminds, man's depravity, the holiness of God, the severity of the law, that without being pronounced righteous for the sake of Christ man is "at enmity with God" [Rom 8:5-9] and by "nature" is a child of "wrath" [Eph 2:4]. That without being "in Christ" i.e. Union with Christ one is still a unrepentent wretched sinner.

Without the foundational understanding that the one must "die to the law" [Rom 7:4; Gal 2:19-21], that is, that the law has broken the person in repentance and the Spirit works faith in the sinner's heart. Since all man is at enmity for breaking the law of God [Rom 8:5-9 cf. 3:19-26] they are under His wrath [Rom 1:18; Eph 4-6], thus condemned to hell in their sin. Unless the law does it's work there is nothing but wrath and condemnation, as without dying to the law one CANNOT exercise saving faith.

But at the end of the day, it is more about emotionalism than an actual interaction with scripture that wins the day for inclusivism and even more so for universalism.