On pages 241-242 of Gaia and God, Rosemary Ruether summarizes the views of Matthew Fox on the cosmic Christ:
"Christ is not simply confined to the historical Jesus, nor only related to human souls. Christ is the immanent Wisdom of God present in the whole cosmos as its principle of interconnected and abundant life. The cosmic Christ is not only the foundational basis of original blessing in creation, but is its telos or direction of fulfillment...For Christians, Jesus is the paradigmatic manifestation of cosmic wisdom and goodness. But he is only one such manifestation. The same wisdom and goodness [underlie] all other religious quests and [have] been manifest in many other symbolic expressions, such as Tao, the Buddha, the Great Spirit, and the Goddess...Fox also calls for dialogue with secular wisdom cultures, such as psychotherapy...The recovery of an ecological spirituality also means that we have to redevelop the 'right brain' or intuitive part of our experience and culture atrophied by masculine dominance. This means attention to the arts and liturgy, dance and bodywork, to reawaken our deadened capacities for holistic experience."
I never really understood what people meant when they said that they believed in the "cosmic Christ." In a number of cases, their point is that they believe in the cosmic Christ rather than the Jesus of traditional Christianity. But what do they mean by "cosmic Christ"? Honestly, I don't know. But I think that I understand what Matthew Fox means by the term: The cosmic Christ is the logos of John 1, who made all things and enlightens every human being who comes into the world. He is the basis for all that exists, as we see in Colossians 1 and Hebrews 1. That sounds biblical to me!
I should note, however, that a conservative Christian could point out that Christ fills all things on account of the unique work of Jesus of Nazareth, for Ephesians 4:10 says that Christ's descent and ascent occurred so that he could fill all things. Colossians 1, right after talking about Christ as creator of all things, goes on to talk about the church. So there is a specific Christian focus here. (And Ruether, citing scholar Patrick Rogers, speculates on page 232 that the stuff in Colossians 1:15-20 about "the church," "the firstborn from the dead," and "the blood of the cross" was added to an earlier hymn about the "cosmological logos.")
And yet, Colossians 1:20 goes back to a universal orientation, saying that Christ died to reconcile all things in heaven and earth to himself.
Is there a way to unite a specific focus on the Christian Jesus and church with a universal orientation, one that holds that God cares for all of humanity, interacts with it, and is somehow trying to guide it towards wholeness---even with those who may not hold to a specific Christian creed?
I recently had an interesting discussion with a conservative Christian about I Timothy 4:10, which affirms that God is the savior of all men, especially of those who believe. Martin Zender says that this verse means that God has saved all, but that those who believe in Christ are the ones who get "front-row seats." My impression is that Zender is a universalist, one who thinks that God will eventually save everybody. A conservative Christian friend of mine posted a couple of articles in response, and I was expecting them to be your typical heresy-hunting articles. I thought they'd say that Martin Zender is a heretic because he's a universalist, and then go on to make the usual conservative Christian arguments about hell being eternal.
But one of the articles did not do this. Rather, it argued that I Timothy 4:10 means that, yes, God is the savior of all men, but not in the sense that God forgives the sins of those who reject Christ. For this article, the passage is saying that God is the savior of all men in that he extends kindness (common grace) to all, both believers and non-believers. To quote the article: "In both the Old and New Testaments the term 'Saviour' is often used to speak of God's providential preservation or deliverance which extends to all men without exception. (Cf. Ps. 36:6; 145:9; Matt. 5:45; Luke 6:35; Acts 17:25, 28.)"
Not all of those passages that the article cites use the term "Savior," but they make the point that God preserves all people. And, as the article notes, there are times when salvation in the Hebrew Bible can mean physical deliverance, not forgiveness of sins or the granting of eternal life. The implication is that God cares for all, and demonstrates that care.
I can't really prove or disprove what "savior" means in I Timothy 4:10. But I like the idea that God is involved in the lives of all people. Personally, I hope that the work of Christ has something that is conducive to such an idea, rather than creating a situation in which, now, God consigns people to eternal torment because they didn't say the sinner's prayer before they died, or chooses to have nothing to do with those who haven't accepted Christ. Isn't the Gospel supposed to be a step up?