Talk:Inclusivism

message: "Some Evangelical scholars believe that God judges all people based on their response to the Holy Spirit, and that just as Romans 2:14-15 shows that God is righteous by condemning people who violate natural law as they understand it, it also shows His mercy in forgiving those who have lived up to all the light they have had. Thus, it is possible for people to be saved through Christ, even if they have not been instructed by Christian missionaries."
Can we be more specific? Which Evangelical scholars? Do we have a citation? It is my understanding that Evangelicals are generally less likely to accept inclusivism, and to use specific Biblical passages (John 14:6) to assert an exclusivist agenda. Some of the better known proponents of inclusivism in Christianity were of the Anglican and Catholic persuasion, which might be seen to promote a more intellectual reading of texts, and a rejection of outright Biblical literalism. Cravenmonket 22:57, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As Americans use the word "Evangelical" you would be right. Inclusivism, or at least partial inclusivism, is in Roman Catholic official teaching part of the Baptism of Desire in addition to saving Catechumens who die unbaptized. Specifically, a Hindu or Muslim or other non-Christian can find the Holy Spirit by serving his or her best understanding of the divine, and by doing so be unconsciously connected to Jesus Christ even without consciously believing in him. I know this for a fact because I am a Roman Catholic and remember learning this in RCIA, so if you give me some time I could ask my parish priest for a source to cite in the appropriate part of the Article. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 22:26, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Evangelical scholars

message: All of those verses are taken out of context, I suggest a revision. Cloud Stryfe 23:30, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biblical Verses 

message: I suggest a look at Schubert M. Ogden's work. He draws a distinction between "monistic" and "pluralistic" forms of inclusivism; I think these terms are clearer and more accurate. The article author's definition of "relativistic inclusivism" sounds, to me, exactly like pluralism.LMVining 05:15, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The terms "traditional" and "relativistic" inclusivism are too ambiguous 

message: The article should maybe discuss relations between inclusivism and gender. Gay rights advocates often refer to themselves as inclusive while calling backers of heterosexual chastity exclusive. This use of the term inclusive has caused a number of divisions among Christians. ADM (talk) 02:25, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Inclusivism and gender

message: The article makes a start on describing inclusivism in religions, but then tries to construct the topic by listing diverse primary religious text verses giving the impression of inclusivism. Very good for an inclusivist affiniado, but not for readers that neutrally want to know what it is and how it is practiced. Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 08:07, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: No secondary sources

message: The lead to this article (and the corresponding article on exclusivism) heavily imply that this is meant to be an article on a way of thinking applicable to cultures, societies, philosophies, etc. and not just religion. Reflecting this, I've consolidated all of the sections on different religions into one section focusing on "Religious inclusivism." If this was a mistake, someone can reverse it. There's still a whole lot of work to be done in improving that section, which I'll work on when I have the time. That being said, this article should be expanded to have sections on inclusivity as it relates to other areas of study. I'm primarily familiar with religious inclusivity, so I may not be the best person for the job, although maybe I'll look into it if I feel like it.  KosaqN (talk) 20:34, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expanding article