Jesus and Ghandi - a brief response

One of the most challenging ideas to come from Jesus is his claim to be the exclusive way to the Father (see John 14:6).  Although, I tend to see Jesus' words as an invitation to faith, there is no getting around its exclusiveness as well.  This, of course, is a direct challenge to a pluralistic notion that all religions/philosophies are really different paths to the same place.  In more common terms, "all roads lead to heaven."   There is perhaps no greater struggle with the idea of exclusivism (that eternal life in the kingdom is reserved for those who have faith in Jesus Christ and the substitutionary atonement for sin that was his sacrificial death), then when we look at someone who was really a very good person but who did not have faith.  The ultimate example of this would probably be Ghandi who seems to always be referenced in a discussion of this sort.  It seems that once again the question where Ghandi spends eternity has come to the centre of the question even within the contemporary Evangelical community (see the recent time article regarding pastor Rob Bell - time).  I know that on the surface it seems unfair and dishonouring to Ghandi to suggest that he might not be in heaven.  I would like to suggest here, however, that it would be more dishonouring to suggest that he is, to force him into something that he himself chose to reject.
The Christian understanding of the cross is one of substitution.  Jesus sacrificed himself to bear the full penalty of death that our sin deserved in order that we might be "justified", or declared in right standing, before God.  The relationship between man and God that had been severed by sin was now reconciled.  It is based on this that one can then expect to spend eternity with God.  This is not just a later teaching about Jesus, but rather a central teaching that is found in the words of Jesus himself.  In the gospel of Matthew for example, when Jesus was leading his disciples in the last supper, He would state that his blood was shed "for the forgiveness of sins" (Matt. 26-28)  Jesus would also state that he came to "give his life as a ransom for many." (Matt. 10:45) There are numerous other examples we could turn to in order to show that Jesus himself understood his death in this manner, and the rest of the scriptural witness then follows suite by teaching this same thing.  There is no way to get around the fact that this is what Jesus taught about himself. 
It is fairly common knowledge that Ghandi read the bible.  I wont go into a lot of specifics, but rather invite you to check it out for yourself.   I will simply share here, that it does not take much digging to find some of his thoughts and interaction with the person and teaching of Jesus.  Some commonly known facts are that Ghandi read the bible, he was intrigued with Jesus, he saw him as a great example of non-violence,  he was particularly influenced by the Sermon on the Mount (found in the gospel of Matthew) and that he encouraged people to read the words of Jesus.  There are a few other things, however, that we need to keep in mind.  Although, he was particularly influenced by the teachings of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount, which is found in Matthew, he did reject the idea of any mysterious or miraculous events in his death.  He did not accept the idea of  substitutionary atonement, or any cosmic significance to Jesus' death.  And yet, we clearly saw above that Jesus, in the gospel of Matthew, clearly taught such an understanding.  Ghandi then, felt free to take what he appreciated, but to reject other parts Jesus' teaching.   Ghandi read about who Jesus was, what Jesus said about himself and his death, and came to his own conclusion.  His conclusion was different from what Jesus said about himself.   The key thing to recognize, however, is that Ghandi's conclusion was an informed one.  He considered the evidence and made his discision. 
It is here that I return to the idea of Ghandi and his eternal existence.  Ghandi read the bible, he read of Jesus and in the end made an informed decision not to believe.  It seems to me that we dishonour him rather than honour him when we try to adjust our theology in order to find a way that he might be able to spend eternity in the presence of the God that he rejected.  Not only do we dishonour Ghandi, but more importantly we dishonour Jesus and the sacrifice that he made on our behalf.  We also, by not recognizing Jesus teaching about himself,  fail to give Jesus the position of authority that he rightly deserves.