John 14:6 and Exclusivism: Confessional Language

Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. - John 14:6

Anyone who has had a conversation about "who goes to heaven" knows John 14:6. It comes up over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and, well... you get the point.

However, could it be that this text is not simply what it appears on the surface? Is there a God who is free to move beneath the mere surface and appearances of the text and move a people to a place of inclusive hope that bubbles up out of this text? This text of all texts?!

Instead of this text being a place where battle lines are drawn, flags are staked, and swords drawn... can this be a text where hands are held and voices call in unison on a God who is merciful and mighty to save, as they confess their sins and their dependence upon Christ and one another? Hopefully, in a few paragraphs I can bring together both the modernist, historical-critical reading of the text and a post-modern, reader-response criticism of the text in order to show that this text is the fertile grounds the Church needs to do just this thing...

The textual context of 14:6 really begins at 13:31 and carries on through 14:17. Jesus informs his disciples that he will be leaving them and that they cannot go with him where he is going - yet. The disciples despair and ask how they could possibly get to where Jesus is going since they do not know "the way." Jesus responds by assuring his disciples by telling them to not let their hearts be troubled by this, because he is "the way." Some strange, hard to decipher language of unity is then used to explain how it could be that Jesus is the way to the father since the two are found within one another. There is a bit of a play on the idea of a "way" as Jesus says at the beginning and then reiterates at the end the fact that if they are His disciples they will in fact live like He did - love for one another. In essence, they will follow the "way" He established and be counted as His disciples.

So already a mere exclusivist notion of "faith in Jesus Christ" being the "only way" is beginning to slip through our hands as quickly as the sand we've attempted to draw it in. However, the intention of the text itself begins to wash away the lines as though like a wave that moves in and out over the sand, again and again, as the community behind the text breathes back and forth from the life that underlies the text itself. You see, what we have here is not a propositional or foundational statement made by Jesus upon which for the Church to then build up some exclusivist soteriology. Instead, we have an apocalyptic confession of a community which has found its identity in Christ and found Christ to be the way to the Father. This text functions not foundationally and propositionally, but rather supplementally and confessionally.

The Fourth Evangelist is not here merely recording Jesus' words as a proposition for the community to accept. Sadly, too often in the Western Evangelical world we have a tendencey to read the text in this sort of way - as well as with the rest of our Bibles. Instead, the Fourth Evangelist is projecting the fears of a community waiting for the time of Christ's return into the text onto the lips of the disciples. The assurance and faith which the community confesses and believes is then placed on the lips of Jesus - the one to whom they trace their faith and in whom their faith is found. So it is not Peter who is unsure of the "way" in the event of Jesus' soon departure... it is a community still waiting 60 years later who is asking earnestly and to whom Jesus assures "I am the way" and then prescribes a way for them to live out in the meantime and promises them a comforter. This fits neatly with the stated purpose of the Johannine Gospel (John 20:31). Even this promise of a comforter is not propositional and foundational, but is instead apocalyptic (after-the-fact/revealed) and confessional. It is a reminder to the community that they indeed have the comforter with them during this time.

So, again, out of the text itself comes a spoken tone which is different. It is the voice of a community which says "we have found that the way we were given - the way were were shown -is good enough." It says that "we know the way, as the way dwelt among us, lived among us, and we have been given testimony of him!"

Now, what of the "no one" clause? After all, isn't this where all the contention is anyways? Well, this is where interesting Social Science criticism has shed some light on the Gospel of John, its community, and the language employed throughout it. This community (again) not making a propositional statement to be accepted as true in a universal context (as though the text were written in a vacuum). The community is responding to the fact that the religious order of the day - the Jewish Synagogue - has kicked them out of Sabbath worship and required that they denounce Christ in the liturgy. Thus, first of all it is only natural that they make a statement directly against this, which affirms (1) the necessity of their continued profession of Christ over against the denunciation asked of them and (2) the futility of the actions of their opponents. The only thing is, we in America do not have these opponents. We do not have those who would make it impossible for us to practice our religion except within an awkward sectarian existence and to which (1) and (2) would be applicable.

So, given what the text does in fact say and that we are left with little ground under our feet as the tide rushes back into the ocean, taking our line with it, what are we to do? Keep drawing lines and hope that the text won't come rushing back and remove our lines and maybe even our footing next time? Or is there somewhere we can go and somewhere we can take the text as a confessional people who confess with the text?

I believe this is the ground that begins to form as the tide rushes back and new ground has been found under the foolish lines we'd drawn. Can we still practice the same confession which is apocalyptic in nature as opposed to foundational and propositional in nature? Can we say with the text that we know the way to the Father because this way has been manifested to us in Jesus Christ and that we find no other salvation but in Him alone? Can we be so bold and yet still find room for the other? For God's Spirit? It is in fact only upon the realization of salvation in Christ that we even come to the confession that we are saved only by Christ. This is what we proclaim because it is all that we know. However, can confession be enough? Can it be enough to confess as a Community of Faith that we as a people find salvation in Jesus Christ and in Him alone? Can we cease all attempts to say so much more than that? I believe that this does indeed open up a space, clear a new ground if you will, on which to affirm that this same Christ that we have come to know as mercy, love, grace, and salvation, can be so even for those who do not confess with us. After all, let us remember that a great many do not fall under the (1) and (2) outlined above.

Are we able to confess that the one who loves Jesus will keep his commandments? Are we able to confess that the one who has the fruits of the Spirit has the Spirit? Are we able to confess that the one who loves one another as Christ has loved us is his disciple? All of this and more is found in the text of John 13:31 -14:17 and therefore lurking beneath the surface of 14:6. Are we able to proclaim our confession of faith which finds no salvation for anyone apart from Christ and yet admit the possibility of salvation for those who are not Christian?

Are we able to practice "the way" of Christ to such an extent that the humility of Christ (Philippians 2) permeates our reading of John 14:6 and it becomes - instead of a text on which we draw our lines of in and out - a text that affirms and teaches us that many will ask "but Lord, when did we do these things to you?"(Matthew 25).