Click to View

Click to View

Deceptive Quote: Christianity Trasher: Denies incarnation

Hick completely denies the incarnation, but is so liberal in his view of the Bible that not even Christadelphians, who also deny the incarnation, would want to quote from this guy!

Hick, John: The Myth of God Incarnate

As quoted by Anti-trinitarians

"There is actually nothing new about the central themes of this book ... That the historical Jesus did not present Himself as God incarnate is accepted by all [theologians] ... Christian laymen today are not fully aware of it. ... (Jesus) did not teach the doctrine of the trinity." (The Myth of God Incarnate, John Hick)

Our Comment

  1. Hick is a flaming modernist who doesn't believe the Bible! The title of the book "Myth of God incarnate" not only denies that Jesus was God incarnate, (trinity) but denies any incarnation period! In other words, Hick and his collection of liberal theologians, don't even believe that Jesus was a pre-existent angel!
  2. John Hick, and his associates who wrote this book are flaming modernists. It is unbelievable that anti-trinitarians would use this book as proof that trinity is of pagan origin. The central theme of the book is to say that "incarnation of Christ" itself is a pagan doctrine and myth. Hick is not debunking "divine incarnation" but "any incarnation" (including the Jw view that Jesus was an incarnate created angel).
  3. Not Even Christadelphians, who also deny the incarnation, would want to quote from this guy!
  4. To quote this book as proof that trinity was not taught in the Bible is no more valid than the other quote from the book that says the entire incarnation theology is not taught in the Bible.
  5. Therefore such a quote is deliberately misleading and unscholarly.

What they don't quote from the book

"The question that I shall be asking in this chapter is whether incarnational faith in this second, more precise sense is in fact essential to Christianity. Could there be a Christianity without (in this sense) incarnation?" (The Myth of God Incarnate, John Hick, p. 1)

Full text:

"For many people, the incarnation of God in Jesus Christ is the essence of Christianity. Here a group of distinguished theologians and Biblical scholars ask whether the idea of the incarnation is essential to Christianity; and they question the whole development of the doctrine. Their thesis is that "Jesus was (as he is presented in Acts 2.21) 'a man approved by God' for a special role within the divine purpose, and . . . the later conception of him as God incarnate, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity living a human life, is a mythological or poetic way of expressing his significance for us." This reinterpretation of the doctrine of the incarnation has been criticized as sensational and destructive, but the authors declare a constructive purpose. They have examined evidence from the New Testament onward with care and thoroughness and have asked their questions because they are concerned with the consequences of their findings for a full and living Christian faith for today. Their work is something that no thinking Christian can ignore. There are ten essays in all, written by editor John Hick, Don Cupitt, Michael Goulder, Leslie Houlden, Dennis Nineham, Maurice Wiles, and Frances Young." ... "Don Cupitt is a University Lecturer in Divinity and Dean of Emmanuel College, Cambridge. Michael Goulder is Staff Tutor in Theology in the Department of Extramural Studies at Birmingham University. John Hick is H. G. Wood Professor of Theology at Birmingham University. Leslie Houlden is Principal of Ripon College, Cuddesdon. Dennis Nineham is Warden of Keble College, Oxford. Maurice Wiles is Regius Professor of Divinity and Canon of Christ Church, Oxford, and Chairman of the Church of England's Doctrine Commission. Frances Young is Lecturer in New Testament Studies at Birmingham University." (The Myth of God Incarnate, John Hick, back cover, inside cover)

Many people, including both conservative believers and perhaps a still larger group of conservative unbelievers, will take exception to the thinking that is going on in this book. They will hold that Christianity consists and always has consisted in a certain definite set of beliefs, and that theologians who seek to modify or 'reinterpret' those beliefs are being disingenuous: it would be more honest of them frankly to abandon the faith as no longer tenable. To this it must be replied that modem scholarship has shown that the supposed unchanging set of beliefs is a mirage. (The Myth of God Incarnate, John Hick, p. X)

"Christianity without Incarnation?: Christianity is often described as an incarnational faith. The phrase may be understood in a looser or a stricter sense. The looser meaning characterizes Christianity as a religion in which man's approach to God is through the physical world rather than by escape from it. In its narrower sense it constitutes a description of Christianity as a faith whose central tenet affirms the incarnation of God in the particular individual Jesus of Nazareth. Incarnational faith in this sense need not be tied to the specific categories of the Chalcedonian Definition, but it does affirm that Jesus of Nazareth is unique in the precise sense that, while being fully man, it is true of him, and of him alone, that he is also fully God, the Second Person of the co-equal Trinity. The question that I shall be asking in this chapter is whether incarnational faith in this second, more precise sense is in fact essential to Christianity. Could there be a Christianity without (in this sense) incarnation? (The Myth of God Incarnate, John Hick, p. 1)

The origins of incarnational doctrine: Incarnation, in its full and proper sense, is not something directly presented in scripture. It is a construction built on the variegated evidence to be found there. Increased historical knowledge has enabled our generation to see this truth about the way in which incarnational doctrine emerged more clearly than some earlier generations. (The Myth of God Incarnate, John Hick, p. 3)

"Thus John Baker writes that 'Jesus did not see himself just as Everyman, nor as the Saviour of the World, even less as a divine pre-existent being from heaven'. He admits that Jesus 'was mistaken about the programme which God planned to follow' and goes on to argue that 'to be in error about the details of the future' is a 'feature of the human condition' that 'could be over-come only by investing Jesus with superhuman powers which might indeed have satisfied the tired old dreams of paganism but would utterly exclude any true incarnation of God." (The Myth of God Incarnate, John Hick, p. 6)

Go To Alphabetical Index Of Deceptive Quotes

Written By Steve Rudd, Used by permission at:

Click to View