A Book Analysis of “Is Jesus the Only Savior”
AN ANALYSIS PAPER SUBMITTED TO
Dr. Daniel Light, PhD
IN COMPLETION OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR
June 18, 2012
The title of Nash’s book is fitting for the content in which it contains. One will not find the traditional arguments that come with Soteriology. Initially, the author thought that he would be reading a book that covers a topic that had been written numerous times and so pleasantly surprised with its content. Nash begins his book with an introduction to three main philosophical views when it comes to the redemptive work of Jesus Christ. Nash does a great job in succinctly defining each of the three main philosophical views. Those views are pluralism, inclusivism, and exclusivism. In the opening chapter of his book, Nash states three reasons for writing this book: (1) To examine pluralism to see if it succeeds in presenting a strong enough case against Christianity’s teaching that Jesus is the only Savior, (2) to examine inclusivism to see if it presents a strong enough case against exclusivism and (3) to present the reasons for espousing exclusivism. Nash begins with defining Christian exclusivism with two necessary statements. Nash defines a Christian Exclusivist as one who believes that Jesus Christ is the only Savior of mankind, and that expressive faith in Jesus Christ are necessary for salvation. Before Nash moves on to briefly defining pluralism and inclusivism, he takes a few pages to position exclusivism and its teaching from the authority of Scripture. This is an important part in the argument for exclusivism because as Nash states, “Such people need to recognize that while humans are free to reject the authority of Scripture, they will only substitute some other authority in its place.” Again the author wants to restate the importance of this statement because a person’s view or opinion on...