Richardson collected missionary stories of the Supreme gods/sky gods of various tribes that knew nothing about Abraham, Israel or the Bible. He presented to the church that the people of these cultures had Jesus as the Son of their God, even when they had no mention of a Son of God, or a triune God. These cultures had no direct connection to the source of true revelation, any revelation of God of the bible was learned from travelers.

Richardson lowered the bar to make these cultures with a mere mention of a flood and creation, myths, as significant to justify God working in their culture. He is advocating cultural mythology as acceptable truth.

He made the supreme gods of all the different tribes (10 in his book) the same God of the Bible. But He did not even prove they were the same god among the different cultures, much less God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. There is no biblical sense in his presentation, in fact, there is no common sense in it either. Are all these other gods the same as Israel’s God? None of these tribal gods are God, only the God of Israel’s 12 tribes is the true God.

So the concept that he presented (which is a progressive theory of religious inclusivism) is meaningless and should have not been accepted as a way to evangelize the nations. But it was accepted and is being used, leading many astray, even creation apologists who have not looked into it further.

This concept becomes a most dangerous teaching because it promotes a religious unity of numerous cultures outside Israel that knew God, some before Israel did. Every believer needs to consider this from a Biblical perspective, not the worlds view.

Lets summarize some of the Biblical inaccuracies that we have seen by Richardson’s book to refresh ourselves in what is taught. He has the myths of cultures speaking truth like the bible (Other stories and details given on the first man, the flood etc.) accepted as if it was transmitted by the same God to the tribe. An example quoted "Belief in Shang Ti/Hananim predates Confucianism, Taoism and Buddhism by an unknown number of centuries" (P. 63 Eternity in their Hearts). That China had worshiped God 2,600 years before Christ, that over 1,000 years before Moses was given the law to Israel, 1,500 years before Christ came.  This is all after the unity at the tower of Babel which began false worship of the nations. Where God purposely confounded their language and spread man throughout the world. It seems so many overlook this event as insignificant affecting only a few, but it resulted in 69 more languages in the divide.

He had a diminished view of the Covenant between God and Israel which changed the uniqueness and importance of Israel. This promotes these cultures to have a spiritual equivalence with Israel, (an example is: Richardson promotes as true, an account of a so called prophet of the Karen people of Burma). To have true prophet he must know God and be sent by Him. (see pt.7) Richardson says: “Could it be that Karen beliefs about Y'wa predate both Judaism and Christianity? … The answer is almost certainly—yes! (p.84 Eternity in their Hearts)

Richardson’s lack of accurate research, containing embellishment’s and conclusions that misled what the myths actually mean. Other researcher’s conclusions contradict his. Also presenting teaching’s built on improper interpretation of Scripture, taking it out of context to make his inclusive arguments. Which leads to Christians accepting the names of other cultures gods as the true God who sent the son.

-- I believe in a loving God. I believe we are all children of the one God, who is called by many names. I believe all religions may be valid paths to the one God (“Christy's Garden,” www.smokylake.com/Christy/bosal).

Roman Catholicism teaches that Muslims along with Catholics worship and adore the same God. (Muslims do not agree with this) Catholicism is in the forefront of this unity as the Popes continue to have interfaith meetings and bring inclusion; it is called Chrislam. But what do we call it is when other tribes cultures are being treated in the same way? RELIGIOUS INCLUSIVENESS

They are intent on having believers get away from an “exclusivist viewpoint” and look at faith in an inclusivist broader perspective. Richardson may not be involved with this directly, but he is in essence saying the very same things.

This is also taught in YWAM where they want to call forth gods gift and fingerprint in every culture. Richardson states “Young men and women are learning that there are things in every culture that are not from the evil one, they’re from God. Things that God has given people to serve as eye openers to help them understand their need of Jesus. And these things are like compasses, cultural compasses that point people to them.” After Richardson we see on the video the application to what he is teaching. Another says he has “learned so much about cultural redemption and how to DISCOVER CHRIST IN OUR CULTURE… speaking of the course “It has inspired me to go back and redempt my culture through god” (University of the nations “Principles of Redeeming cultures school” posted on youtube)

So God has himself in every culture yet these cultures have a completely different system than Israel. The biblically grounded believer understands this is a counterfeit that brings inclusivism.

While God is the creator of all people Kikawa’s assumption, as is Richardsons is that these culture’s gods are the same as the God who formed Israel and gave them (alone) the oracles. They received from God also.

One of Richardsons examples is “Hindus anticipate what they call "the tenth incarnation of Vishnu." A young missionary in India, desperate to gain the attention of Hindus, decided to proclaim Jesus Christ as simply that—the tenth incarnation of Vishnu!”… While Richardson does not agree with this tactic he does say “They should not, however, with their next breath argue from one such instance that the viewpoint of other cultures is basically irrelevant when one approaches those cultures with the gospel. That sort of deduction is an example of "throwing the baby out with the bathwater."

The fact remains that Hindu belief in the possibility of deity becoming incarnate among men makes us more understandable when we talk to Hindus about "the Word who became flesh, and dwelt among us"—not on successive occasions but once and for all time! (P.53 Eternity in their Hearts)

Potential points of contact used to bring one to Christ is far different than finding Christ in their culture or telling them they have truth. From my perspective, Richardson does not use these points in these cultures myths as springboards toward Christianity but actually affirms them as some ancient truth of the Bible, even the god they have known before the missionaries came is true.

As another writer explains “… the indigenous people confused between the Enlightened One and the Almighty One—the creature and the creator. As a result, employing the Burmese Buddhist atheistic term Paya [ဘုရား Bhura] as the Christian God has been problematic in the postcolonial time Christian mission.9

The facts are, any trace of the original monotheism found in any religion is also contained with polytheistic, henotheistic and animistic beliefs. It is quite rare to be by itself and even then it does not mean the one god is the same as the true God of Israel, we have numerous examples even today. Richardson sees the monotheism of Islam has problems.

“In Ethiopia, Jesus Christ was equal to the Son of Magana (their one supreme God (p. 48-50 Eternity in their Hearts)

“The Mbaka people of Central Africa had one supreme God called 'Koro" and they knew also of Koro's Son who was sent into the world to do something wonderful for all mankind, but they but they forgot (over time) yet did know somehow that a 'white brother' would come to restore this knowledge. They also had "rituals of passage" and blood sacrifices and baptismal immersions that paralleled the Judeo-Christian tradition” (Eternity in their Hearts. p. 50-51.)

“The Baka are African Traditional Religionists that believe in the power of bark and metamorphosis. The Baka people worship Komba and believe him to be god above all. The spirit plays the role of the mediator between the supreme being, Komba, and the Baka people" (Azombo, Franklin. "Le Synode du Diocese Du Batouri". Regard sur la culture et la religion des Bakas. Retrieved 22 October 2013)

All these gods become legitimate in Richardson’s handling, however, nearly every time there is crucial information that is not included because it would contradict his theorem which does contradict the bible.

The Baka also worship the forest spirit called Jengi (also known as Djengui or Ejengi).The Baka thus compare Jengui to a protecting father or guardian.[IC Magazine: Supporting the Indigenous Peoples Movement". (Retrieved 21 October 2013. from en.wikipedia)

Richardson quoting another, “Even tribal "rites of passage" among the Mbaka, Eugene says, show Judeo-Christian parallels. First, the elders offered a blood sacrifice for the initiate. Then they baptized the initiate by immersion in a river. For several days following his baptism, the initiate must behave like a newborn child! In keeping with the imagery, he is not permitted to talk. (p.58 eternity in their Hearts)

I don’t see what Richardson sees, I find something very different from so many others who also do research on these matters.

But unfortunately the majority of people do not look any further than his book for what these tribes are about. They are in the category of the naïve, unlearned, making a decision by a little information (that is slanted) not looking any further into the matter (I have only scratched the surface). They may not even care that he is not delivering the truth. As long as it worked, which makes them practicing pragmatism, not Biblical Christianity. They want to believe in religious inclusivism and avoid the scriptures that speak of the narrow path. This puts them in a precarious position in their relationship to Christ an the truth that is His word.

They should have carefully studied his THEORY, scrutinized it before they accepted it as part of their quiver for evangelism. There are far too many looking for the next best help tool when they should learn how to better explain the gospel to meet the need to any and all people.

The theorem of God having revealed himself by planting a root for the Gospel within each culture to call people to Christ, by using the practices within their culture is simply not true. We need to approach this biblically not like an anthropologist. Rom.16:25 says the gospel is revealed by the scripture, not culture. God did not create, nor was He involved in these cultures. Not even our western culture (they were on their own just as the Bible teaches, Acts 14:16). The creator identifies with Israel’s culture whom He formed and gave them the practices that were shadows until the light came to them. This cultural religious inclusivism is masquerading as another gospel.

The people we appeal to are those who are willing to look further, to have their eyes opened, that are willing to think, or become Biblical thinkers. To be those who want to adhere to Jesus’ and the apostles words.

This movement of cultural inclusivism is growing. What is at stake is the health of the church because what has been introduced is a foreign teaching, a strange teaching that has already become a trend, to look for Christ in your culture. And it leads to the very place of unity that is explained in Rev.17.