Growing up, all I heard was that if someone hadn't accepted Christ (whatever the hell that means), then they could enjoy a very heat-intensive afterlife. My assumption is that most people who grew up in church would share this same experience. I accepted this teaching because I didn't know any better, and since I had accepted Jesus as my personal Savior, then what the hell did I care? I was on the right side of the ledger anyway.
As I've grown, studied, and spent years with people on "both sides of the ledger" as a pastor, I find myself wondering about the universality of Christ's gospel. After all, his gospel was that "the Kingdom of God is at hand." In other words, the way of life God proposes for all people was available for all people and it was perfectly modeled in the person of Jesus. This means, as Evangelicals half-rightly suppose, that to live in harmony with God, you must follow Jesus. Here's where I take a sharp turn from the typical Evangelical way of thinking. They suppose that in order to follow Jesus, you must, at some point, make an intellectual assent to Jesus and his teachings. In other words, you must have correct doctrine about who Jesus was. My problem with all of that is that there is hardly ever any mention of living like Jesus as a requisite for following Jesus. This means that a man like Gandhi, someone who closely mimicked Christ's life and teachings is frying, but that dickhead Christian that sits on the third row that has no real interest in Jesus will reap eternal rewards for "accepting Jesus as his Savior" 50 years ago.
It seems to me that if you're going to follow someone, then it has very little to do with assenting to all of their teachings as true, but actually trying to mimic their way of living. When I was small, I wanted to play basketball like Isaiah Thomas. When I practiced in my parents' driveway, I wasn't wondering what Isaiah Thomas thought about anything, I spent my time trying to mimic his movements on the court. I studied all of his idiosyncrasies and tried to be a perfect carbon copy of him. Incidentally, I sucked and wasn't anywhere near his level (I think there's some spiritual merit in that statement as well), but it didn't stop me from trying. I didn't give a damn about Isaiah's way of thinking, I just wanted to be him. It seems to me that we are now at the heart of the matter.
Jesus made it abundantly clear that following him was of utmost importance. He never once says that if we don't intellectually assent to following him, then we have no part of him. He did, however, say that unless we "humble ourselves and become like little children," "die to ourselves," "eat his flesh and drink his blood," then we have no part of him. Following Jesus is a matter of what's in your heart, not your head. It doesn't mean that you shouldn't ever mentally assent to certain things about Jesus' life, death, and resurrection, it just means that it isn't really the crux of the matter. You're a follower of Jesus if you follow him. You can follow him even if you didn't know you were following him.
To me, this means that anyone, regardless of their nationality and their creeds can be a part of God's Kingdom, a kingdom built on the foundations of love, peacemaking, and compassion. Screw right theology, doctrine, and any other manmade avenue of "finding God." If you want to live in harmony with the creator of the universe, live a life of love, peace, and compassion. Don't forget that 2000 years ago, Jesus appeared to a people who claimed to have the only access to the true God. He pissed a lot of people off by claiming that God was accessible to all. Maybe all of our Buddhist, Muslim, Hindu, etc. hating is on the same plane as the Jews 2000 years ago. Maybe Jesus is more accessible to the masses than we think he is.
After all, the writer of Colossians does say, "For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him (Jesus), and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross" (Colossians 1:19-20). This has to be a terrifying passage of Scripture for a fundamentalist who wants so badly to be right, because it seems to suggest that the cross was a once-for-all universal act that put everyone on the right side of the ledger. This seems to fit very well with the teachings of Jesus. I understand that there are numerous passages that seem to contradict this line of thought, but I concur that those passages fly in the face of what Jesus taught and tried to accomplish.
The Kingdom of God seems to be a way of life, not an ideology. This way of life is accessible to people from every tribe and tongue, even they have no mental idea of who Jesus was and is.