Where is Life Located: Rethinking John 14:6, exclusivity, and a hopeful soteriology

TL;DR

John 14:6 may not primarily be a statement about who gets into heaven, but about where life actually is. In the Gospel of John, Jesus’ claim to be “the way, the truth, and the life” is ontological before it is soteriological. All salvation is Christological in origin — if anyone comes to the Father, it is by Christ. But that does not automatically define the final scope of who may participate in that salvation. This reading preserves the strength of the text while allowing for a hopeful soteriology.

What if you can’t accept that 90% of the world is going to hell?

The other night, I was in a church small group and the discussion moved to John 14:6.

Now, it’s important to note that in this church, I don’t serve in a pastoral role. While members of the group know I serve as a hospital chaplain and I think some may know that I am ordained or have served in pastoral roles before, I really try hard to just be a member of the group. Especially when complicated or potentially divisive topics come up, I try to be another voice, not an authoritative one.

I even have awkward conversations at times with pastoral staff about titles. I’ll refer to them as “Pastor Bill,” but I don’t want them referring to me as “Pastor Loren.” For me, at least, the title of pastor represents spiritual authority. In that church, I don’t hold that authority. I am submitting to theirs.

So back to John 14:6.

One week, a pastor preached about John 14:6, heaven, and inclusion. Later that week, the topic came up in small group. When the question was posed about what we had been taught about that verse — or who would be in heaven — my mind went immediately back to my formative years as an Independent Baptist, especially my time at Baptist Bible College in Springfield, Missouri (now Mission University).

Two memories stand out.

The first was a freshman missions class taught by Professor Lingo. He challenged us with a blunt question: would “unreached people groups” who have never heard about Jesus still go to hell?

His answer was unambiguously yes.

The reasoning went something like this: if you tell them about Jesus and they reject him, you’ve now sealed their fate. Better ignorance than rejection I guess?

As an aside, I know that makes Professor Lingo sound like a villain. He wasn’t. He had served on the mission field for years. His teaching style actually required thinking — not memorizing and regurgitating. While he was conservative theologically, he was not anti-intellectual. I respect his thinking and teaching, even if I disagree with his foundations or conclusions.

The second memory was when I realized the math of fundamentalist Christianity was something I could not accept.

We were taught that about 33% of the world identified as “Christian,” though many of those were Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Pentecostal, or what I would later become — Mainline Protestant. Missionaries from our Baptist circles regularly went to heavily Catholic or Orthodox countries assuming there were no “gospel preaching churches” there. Chapel speakers often preached evangelistic sermons assuming not everyone in the room was even saved.

Eventually, the equation formed in my mind.

If our narrow theological lane was correct, then something like 90% of the world was headed for hell.

I couldn’t accept those numbers.

That realization eventually led me into the mainline world, into seminary, and toward a more progressive version of Christianity. And yet, even as I’ve discovered the limitations of progressive theology, I still wrestle with how to interpret texts like John 14:6 without either reverting to my old framework or dismissing the text entirely.

To be honest, I’ve found that many progressive interpretations of the verse feel too thin. One I heard recently suggested Jesus was simply saying we should “be like him and love others.”¹ But to me that doesn’t really take the text seriously.

Jesus does say, in Greek, ego eimi — “I am.” And John does record him saying he is “the way, the truth, and the life.”

So the other night, lying awake and ruminating, I grabbed my phone and opened ChatGPT. I often use it as a thinking partner when I’m trying to pressure-test an idea.

And I wondered:

What if John 14:6 is not primarily a soteriological claim — about who gets saved — but an ontological one?

An Ontological Reading of John 14:6

In the Gospel of John, Jesus is not introduced as a religious option among many. He is the Logos — the one through whom all things were made (1:3), in whom is life (1:4), the true light that enlightens everyone (1:9).

That matters.

John 14:6 is one of the great “I am” statements in John’s Gospel — and those are not casual metaphors. Many scholars recognize them as echoing God’s self-revelation to Moses in Exodus 3. When Jesus says “I am,” Jesus is making a theological claim about divine identity.

So when Jesus says:

“I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”

He is not first giving directions to heaven.

He is identifying himself as:

• the embodied access to the Father

• the unveiling of divine reality

• the very life of God made present

Even the Greek of “except through me” (εἰ μὴ δι’ ἐμοῦ) can be rendered quite literally as “if not by me.” Grammatically, it emphasizes mediation.

It does not say, “Only this group will be saved.”

It says, “There is no coming to the Father if not through me.”

That is a claim about source.

If anyone comes to God — anywhere, at any time — it is by Christ.

All salvation is Christological in origin.

That is explicit.

What it does not explicitly define is the final scope of who may participate in that salvation.

And I think that distinction matters.

A Hopeful Soteriology

This is where something often called “hopeful universalism” becomes relevant. Chat GPT tells me this is associated most famously with Hans Urs von Balthasar. Hopeful universalism does not assert that all will certainly be saved. It says we may hope for the salvation of all because Christ’s saving work is universal in mediation and intent.

There is no salvation apart from Christ.

But Christ may not be absent where he is unrecognized.

That preserves the force of John 14:6.

It intensifies Christ’s centrality.

It simply refuses to turn the verse into a census.

Christ is the ontological center through whom any salvation that occurs — occurs.

Judgment passages in John can still stand. Light exposes. Law reveals. But Christ is the remedy and the fulfillment.

This reading keeps the text strong without returning to the theological math problem that once troubled me.

It locates life.

It does not calculate percentages.

A Final Word

I’m still thinking about all of this.

I don’t offer it as a settled conclusion or a new doctrinal hill to die on. Part of what pushed me here was simply lying awake, wrestling with the text, and then grabbing my phone to use ChatGPT as a thinking partner to pressure-test ideas. For me, that wasn’t outsourcing theology — it was interrogating my assumptions.

I’m not certain.

I don’t know the final shape of salvation. I don’t pretend to see the full scope of Christ’s work. But this ontological reading of John 14:6 — this idea that the verse locates the source of life rather than drawing a tight perimeter around heaven — feels closer.

But, what I do think is:

It keeps Christ central.

It keeps the text serious.

And it leaves room for hope.

I welcome pushback, refinement, and conversation. I’m still learning.

1. This was NOT from the pastor, to be clear.