Hick’s first argument was based on the belief that scientific view of biblical teachings was null and void. He believed that it was not possible for modern biblical teachings to agree with the traditional Christian beliefs. He stated that if it is true that there is incarnation as believed by Christians, then Christianity would be a very unique religion. However, the problem with this point is that the belief in incarnation is quite incoherent in its explanation. The belief in the doctrine of incarnation forms a vital part of the world religion but the only problem is that it is incoherent.
The second argument is that the spirit of God operates in all religions to initiate a common religious experience that awakens God’s spirituality. God’s spiritual awakening is manifested at the point where believers abandon self-centeredness and offer themselves to serve God and others. He further argues that religious experience is reason enough to believe in God. He further states that religious experience needs to be trusted since it acts as a good source of knowledge. When a person claims to experience something and believe in it; such a belief should be justified unless there is reason enough to have a contrary opinion. However, the problem with this argument is that it only focuses on affirming the rationality of believing in something but rather not the obligation of believing.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Hick’s third argument is that the regeneration aspect from which the Christian life starts is merely a species of genus that is common in every Christian faith. In this statement, he seems to downplay the ontological status of God. However, this argument has a problem because Christian regeneration is a separate occurrence that cannot in any way reduced to salvific experience defined by the awakening or awareness of God followed by abandonment of self-centeredness.
