One of the most notorious traits of Christian belief is it’s narrowness. This is reflected in the doctrine that unless one knows of Jesus and accepts him one cannot be saved. One will go to Hell forever. The Bible says that to be a Christian is to possess here and now ETERNAL life. This life is obtained by simply believing in Jesus for it.
It is bigotry to say that people will not go to Heaven unless they accept Jesus Christ.
People think it is great if Christians say that Jesus can save you without you knowing it is him. But that is intolerant and patronising.  It implies that Jesus is so powerful he can override your ignorance and stupidity.
If there is good enough evidence it is not. But there isn’t. The doctrine is a mask for intolerance and scare mongering. Receiving Jesus is seen as death to sin and to whatever Jesus forbids even if it is not really harmful. It is a living death. Paul said he carries the cross of Jesus in the body. The Christian is asked to die for Christ and people are brainwashed to praise that even if they think Jesus was not a credible son of God! But that life would be there if the person didn’t believe. It is gone for nothing because she does. That is very very wrong.
Some argue that a pagan or idolater could in fact be saved by the Jesus they know spiritually but don't know explicitly as Jesus. That is just confusing wishful thinking and airy fairy nonsense.
Romans 10 says there is no salvation but for those but for those who believe in their hearts in Jesus as Saviour and says they need to ask the Lord’s help and that cannot be done unless they believe in him and they cannot believe unless they have heard. Faith comes from what is preached and what is preached is the word of Christ. Paul goes out of his way to avoid such fuzzy feel-good rubbish as that which Christian liberals come up with.
The doctrine that you are only saved by the gospel if you hear it (Romans 10:17) clearly rules out any notion of mystical salvation from Jesus. The doctrine is patronising and it is still narrow for it is still saying Jesus is the only way to religious fulfilment. It would be odd to start arguing that a person who worships Satan is unknowingly worshipping Jesus! That is what some of those mystics seem to want to be able to believe.
Say you are pagan. If Jesus’ grace comes to you without you knowing anything about his life or what he is like then you don’t know who or what you have this supernatural relationship with. The Christian only thinks you are in touch with Jesus but what if you are not? And the Bible warns that many of us do not realise that our relationship with God is not about him but about a version of him we want to believe in.
John 5:24 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life. " This was spoken to believing Jews. Jesus was saying you need to know of him and his gospel to be saved and you can be saved here and now.
John 11:25 Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; 26and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?"
You might say that God can simply forgive sin without needing Jesus to make up for us by atonement. But Paul wrote that it is vital to believe that Christ died for sins and it was not for nothing (Galatians 2:21).
If you read the “infallible” decrees of the Roman Catholic Church you will see how the Council of Florence said that nobody at all could be saved outside the Roman Catholic Church.
The bigoted wishful thinking that makes Christians think one needs to know and believe in Jesus explicitly came from Jesus himself as we shall see. The new Catholic doctrine embracing the ecumenical movement which aims for religious unity is heretical.
The biggest reason that many religionists are more tolerant than they used to be is because of the overwhelming influence of the modern tendency to teach, "Think and believe what you like and God will be happy as long as you are sincere." They are under severe social and political pressure to take this stance. Some teach that sincerity is dangerous outside the true faith for sincerity can lead one astray but that is more a criticism of the consequence that can take place not the sincerity itself. The same people teach that love is dangerous - which it is - and that doesn't imply that they think love is bad.
In the past, Christianity held that if a man murdered prostitutes to prevent them passing on venereal disease that man was evil and sinful BECAUSE of his sincerity. The law of the land takes the same approach as the Church. You are considered an evil person if you smash up statues in a Catholic Church and you can't point to the Bible where it commands you to destroy idols to get the law to change its mind. Your faith won't get you off the hook.
If you thoughtlessly fire a brick over the wall and kill somebody you are still regarded as an evil person despite your harmless intentions and your sincerity. You will go to jail for manslaughter. Some praise you that you didn't do this in malice. Others wisely observe that recklessness and thoughtfulness do more harm in life than malice. You put flightiness before the welfare of others. That is worse than malice. There is a limit to what harm malice will make you do and often you will do nothing. Feeling malice doesn't mean you put something before the target of your malice. Carelessness does.
The good intentions of a person who lets their dog do exactly what it wishes all the time don't alter the fact that this person is practicing a form of cruelty. Discipline is necessary.

The Church always taught that we do evil only for the sake of the good in it. There is a sincerity even in insincerity. You are sincerely thinking insincerity is good.

You would need to be very sincere that you were right and God was wrong if you would go to Hell to suffer forever for your sin. That is extreme martyrdom! It is impossible to beat that for sincerity.
The Church says that a man can have original sin and believe he doesn't but that doesn't exonerate him of this sin. It doesn't rescue him from the fact that original sin separates him from being united in intimacy with God even if he thinks he is in God's bosom. The Church says that baptism and not sincerity is what deals with original sin. The idea that sincerity will save by itself is totally incompatible with true Christian belief.
If a bishop when ordaining a priest refuses to do it validly the priest will not be a true priest at all. His belief that he is a priest will not change that. God will not take his sincerity into account and treat him as a real priest and let him have the power to change the bread and wine at the Eucharist into the body and blood of Jesus Christ.

Christian doctrine certainly indicates that having certain beliefs is absolutely necessary for salvation.

Jesus said he was the way the truth and the life and no man could get to God but by him. The apostles taught that Jesus was the only name under Heaven by which a man could be saved. Jesus said that anybody who got into the kingdom any other way than him was a robber. The Bible teaches that Jesus is the only way to God.
Why is Jesus the only way to God?
Is it so that we can get easy and fast access to God through him?
It must be for no other reason would justify it. It makes God friendly and welcoming. [If you can really call that warm and friendly, that is another question!]
How is Jesus the only way to God?
Theologians say he is because he has paid for our sins to God.
Is Jesus the only way to God because he is the only person who can atone for our sin?
Jesus atoning for sins would not necessarily mean he was the way. He would be merely taking away the sins or the barrier between man and God. The bulldozer that takes down a wall that stops you getting to the Hotel is not the way to the hotel. Jesus being the way means more than him just breaking down a wall but showing you the way and leading you personally. He does it alone. He doesn’t use intermediaries.
Correct Christianity is totally bigoted. It insists that agreeing with the Bible and believing it is absolutely necessary to salvation. You need to consciously know Jesus to be saved. Those who say that believing in the Christian gospel is necessary only for those who reject it knowingly will have to say, “Believing is not absolutely necessary for salvation. Just knowing what the truth is and refusing to believe it is sinful.” This means that disobedience not disbelief itself is where the sin is in. The Bible is totally clear that faith in Christ is necessary for salvation for the Jews were not considered right with God until they came to Christ in faith.

The Amplified Bible


Documents of the Christian Church, edited by Henry Bettenson, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1979
Ecumenical Jihad, Peter Kreeft, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 1996
‘God, That’s not fair!’ Dick Dowsett, OMF Books, Overseas Missionary Fellowship, Belmont, The Vine, Sevenoaks, Kent TN13 3TZ] Kent, 1982
Handbook of Christian Apologetics, Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, Monarch, East Sussex, 1995
Is There Salvation Outside The Catholic Church? Fr J Bainvel SJ, TAN, Illinois, 1979
Jesus the Only Saviour, Tony and Patricia Higton, Monarch Tunbridge Wells, Kent, 1993
Roman Catholicism, Loraine Boettner, Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, Phillipsburg, New Jersey, 1987
The Case for Faith, Lee Strobel, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 2000
What About Those Who Have Never Heard? Radio Bible Class, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1986
When Critics Ask, Norman Geisler and Thomas Howe, Victor Books, Illinois ,1992


No Copyright