ABSTRACT
It is evident that the christological approaches of John Hick and Lesslie Newbigin could shake each other, with regards to their different views of revelation and Western modernity, but since they are only partially attentive to the concreteness of others, their mutual shakenness is limited. Firstly, they both oversimplify, or generalize, the otherness of the Christian tradition, in the sense that Hick caricatures that which he seeks to re-express and Newbigin places a great deal of evangelical faith beyond debate; so they are only partially shaken by ‘others’ within the tradition. Secondly, they are both more indifferent to plural other traditions than they mean to be, in Hick’s case by treating the differences as largely only apparent and in Newbigin’s case by restricting the others’ validity to the extent to which they serve the gospel; so they are only partially shaken by ‘others’ beyond the Christian tradition. Finally, the relative impotence of Hick’s transformative ethic, simply advocating selflessness and tolerance, and the absoluteness of Newbigin’s Christ, obscuring his connection with the unfinished basileia of God, impede their ability to act in solidarity with the invisible or marginalized others. Further shakenness is thus required.
