DOCSLIB.ORG

Investigating the Affinity Between Søren Kierkegaard And

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Investigating the Affinity Between Søren Kierkegaard And INTRODUCING CHRISTIANITY INTO CHRISTENDOM: INVESTIGATING THE AFFINITY BETWEEN SØREN KIERKEGAARD AND THE EARLY THOUGHT OF KARL BARTH BY SEAN A. TURCHIN A THESIS PRESENTED FOR THE DEGREE OF PhD THE UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH SCHOOL OF DIVINITY 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS........................................................................iv INTRODUCTION: Barth’s Relation to Kierkegaard…………………..........1 Introducing the Problem The Barthian Lenses: The Problem The Problem Addressed Task and Procedure CHAPTER ONE: Kierkegaard’s Dialectical Theology ................................22 Introduction: Procedure .....................................................................22 Kierkegaard’s Authorship ..................................................................24 1. Introduction 2. Historical Backdrop: Hegelian Christianity 3. The Authorship’s Task Speculative Philosophy and Knowledge of God: The Infinite Qualitative Difference ........................................................................44 1. The Self With/Without Selfhood and God 2. Christ as Knowledge of God Christ and History ..............................................................................68 Faith and Offence ...............................................................................84 Conclusion......................................................................................................89 CHAPTER TWO: Kierkegaard and Der Römerbrief : The Infinite Qualitative Distinction ..........................................................................................91 Introduction: Procedure .....................................................................91 Kierkegaard in Romans II : Problems .................................................92 The Infinite Qualitative Distinction and Dialectical Theology ..........96 1. The Historical Context of the Significance of the Infinite Qualitative Distinction 2. Barth’s possible familiarity with Kierkegaard’s thought: The Kierkegaard Renaissance 3. The Function of the Infinite Qualitative Distinction in Romans II 4. The Grounding of the Infinite Qualitative Distinction 5. Barth’s misapprehension of Kierkegaard’s dialectic of the Infinite Qualitative Distinction: Positive dimensions of the Infinite Qualitative Distinction History and Christian Truth .............................................................129 Paradox: The Incarnation and History .............................................132 Faith and Offence .............................................................................147 Conclusion .......................................................................................155 ii CHAPTER THREE: Kierkegaard and the Göttingen Dogmatics ...............160 Introduction: Procedure and Problems .............................................160 1. The Objective of the Göttingen Dogmatics 2. Evidencing a Problem with Kierkegaard Man as His Question: Human Existence as Contradiction .............170 1. A More Refined Anthropology 2. Barth on the Self as Contradiction 3. Kierkegaard and Barth on the Self The Objective Possibility of Revelation ..........................................186 1. God as Object in Jesus Christ 2. The Paradox of Revelation 3. Christ and History 4. Indirect Communication and Contemporaneity The Subjective Possibility of Revelation .........................................207 1. The Recipients of Revelation 2. Faith as Subjectivity CONCLUSION ............................................................................................220 iii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS CUP Concluding Unscientific Postscript [1846] PF Philosophical Fragments [1844] POV The Point of View For My Work as an Author [Posthumous 1859] PC Practice in Christianity [1851] SUD The Sickness unto Death [1849] JP The Journals and Papers Disclaimer: Some of the material in the section, Kierkegaard’s Dialectical Theology and Barth’s possible familiarity with Kierkegaard’s thought: The Kierkegaard Renaissance is taken from my M.A. thesis, Examining the Primary Influence on Karl Barth’s Epistle to the Romans. iv INTRODUCTION: BARTH’S RELATION TO KIERKEGAARD: PROBLEMS AND PROCEDURE Introducing the Problem The Swiss theologian Karl Barth’s (1886-1968) relation to the Danish thinker Søren Kierkegaard (1813-1855) is one which has been touched upon repeatedly with regard to influence and parallels. It is an issue that has produced diverse conclusions ranging from that of T. F. Torrance, who believed Barth to have been influenced by Kierkegaard to an extent even unknown to himself, 1 to the likes of Bruce McCormack 2 who views the affinity as exaggerated. 3 However, this intriguing relationship refuses a conclusive position regarding the extent to which Barth had been influenced by Kierkegaard; any attempt that seeks to resolve this question disregards both the complexity of Barth’s thought and the sheer range of thinkers who had contributed to his theological development.4 Moreover, Barth’s own comments on the influence of Kierkegaard on his development complicate the investigation into the relationship between the two. Whereas in 1922 Barth admits a dependence on Kierkegaard in the second edition of The Epistle to the Romans , by 1963 he has assumed a more cautious relation to Kierkegaard. In 1963, Barth accepted the Sonning Prize in Copenhagen, Denmark, in recognition of his role in facilitating Kierkegaard’s reception in both the German and 1 See, T.F. Torrance, Karl Barth: An Introduction to His Early Theology 1910-1031 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1962), 44. 2 See, Bruce L. McCormack, Karl Barth’s Critically Realistic Dialectical Theology: Its Genesis and Development 1909-1936 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995), 216-217. 3The scholarship addressing this relationship, although not mentioned specifically here, will be mentioned throughout this work as relevant to the specific discussion at hand. Therefore, the various considerations given by both Barth and Kierkegaard scholarship which aid in both obscuring and/or clarifying this relationship between Barth and Kierkegaard will be noted at length. 4 For a full discussion of Barth’s theological development see, Bruce L. McCormack, Karl Barth’s Critically Realistic Dialectical Theology: Its Genesis and Development 1909-1936 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995). 1 English speaking world. 5 Commenting on this role Barth states, “The second edition of my Epistle to the Romans is the very telling document of my participation in what has been called ‘the Kierkegaard Renaissance.’” 6 As is well known, Barth’s participation in the Kierkegaard Renaissance is confirmed in his own attributing of his methodology of the second edition of the Epistle to the Romans (hereafter Romans II ) as one grounded in Kierkegaard’s concept of the infinite qualitative difference (hereafter IQD ) between God and humanity. Continuing his speech, Barth notes what he, and others, had learned from Kierkegaard at that time: [What] attracted us particularly to him, what we rejoiced in, and what we learned, was the criticism, so unrelenting in its incisiveness, with which he attacked so much: all the speculation which blurred the infinite qualitative difference between God and man…all the attempts to make the scriptural message innocuous, all the too pretentious and at the same time too cheap christianism and churchiness of prevalent theology, from which we ourselves were not as yet quite free .7 Yet the influence of Kierkegaard’s thought on Barth’s Romans II extends beyond the confines of this one concept alone. Romans II repeatedly makes use of Kierkegaardian terminology such as Paradox, Incognito, indirect communication , etc. 8 Interestingly, however, after reminiscing those early days, Barth’s tone suddenly shifts in direction. He asks, “Did not a new anthropocentric system announce itself in Kierkegaard’s theoretical groundwork – one quite opposed to that 5 Although the name “Kierkegaard” is seen scattered and imbedded throughout the works of a few theologians at the dawning of the twentieth century, it was predominantly Barth who had introduced the theological world to Kierkegaard’s thought which found its debut in Barth’s better known second edition of the Epistle to the Romans (Der Römerbrief ). For a further, but brief, examination of Barth’s role in the Kierkegaard Reception in Germany, see Heiko Schulz, “Germany and Austria: A Modest Head Start: The German Reception of Kierkegaard” in Kierkegaard’s International Reception Tome I: Northern and Western Europe , edited by Jon Stewart (Ashgate, 2009), pp. 307-387. 6 Karl Barth, “Thank –You and a Bow: Kierkegaard’s Reveille” in Canadian Journal of Theology , Vol. XI.I (1965), 5. 7 Ibid., 5. 8 McCormack questions whether the presence of “Kierkegaardian language and concepts” in Romans II is suggestive of influence. It could be that Barth, suggests McCormack, merely borrowed Kierkegaard’s concepts but then received the “content” from others such as Heinrich Barth. See, McCormack, Karl Barth’s Critically Realistic Dialectical Theology: Its Genesis and Development 1909-1936 , 237. 2 at which we aimed?” 9 In light of Barth’s own admission that his methodology is Kierkegaardian, coupled with his use of other Kierkegaardian language, his questioning, here, is intriguing. 10 Kierkegaard’s influence on Romans II was, for Barth, significant when contrasted with the first edition, which Barth later thought yet too reflective of the liberal theological training he had acquired while studying at Bonn, Tübingen, and Marburg. However, with
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Theodicy: an Overview
    1 Theodicy: An Overview Introduction All of us struggle at one time or another in life with why evil happens to someone, either ourselves, our family, our friends, our nation, or perhaps some particularly disturbing instance in the news—a child raped, a school shooting, genocide in another country, a terrorist bombing. The following material is meant to give an overview of the discussion of this issue as it takes place in several circles, especially that of the Christian church. I. The Problem of Evil Defined Three terms, "the problem of evil," "theodicy," and "defense" are important to our discussion. The first two are often used as synonyms, but strictly speaking the problem of evil is the larger issue of which theodicy is a subset because one can have a secular problem of evil. Evil is understood as a problem when we seek to explain why it exists (Unde malum?) and what its relationship is to the world as a whole. Indeed, something might be considered evil when it calls into question our basic trust in the order and structure of our world. Peter Berger in particular has argued that explanations of evil are necessary for social structures to stay themselves against chaotic forces. It follows, then, that such an explanation has an impact on the whole person. As David Blumenthal observes, a good theodicy is one that has three characteristics: 1. "[I]t should leave one with one’s sense of reality intact." (It tells the truth about reality.) 2. "[I]t should leave one empowered within the intellectual-moral system in which one lives." (Namely, it should not deny God’s basic power or goodness.) 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Joshua Cockayne Thesis.Pdf
    The God-Relationship: A Kierkegaardian account of the Christian spiritual life Joshua Luke Cockayne PhD University of York Philosophy July 2016 Abstract By drawing on the writings of Søren Kierkegaard, I address the question of what it is to live in relationship with God. In answering this question, it is important to recognise that God, as he is described in the Christian tradition, is a personal God. For this reason, the account of the Christian spiritual life I outline is described as a life of coming to know God personally, rather than as a life of coming to know about God by learning about him. As I argue, a minimal condition for knowing God personally in this way is that an individual has a second-person experience of God. However, one of the barriers which prevents relationship with God from occurring in this life is that the human will is defective in such a way that human beings cannot will to be in union with God. Because of this problem, human beings cannot live in union with God in this life. And so, in order to allow for the possibility of union with God in the life to come, the human will must be repaired; consequently, one of the key tasks of the spiritual life is this task of repairing a person’s will by re-orienting it so that union with God is possible. Since a person cannot be in union with God in this life, it is important to give an account of what it is to be in relationship with God in the spiritual life.
    [Show full text]
  • Welcome to Christendom College's
    Please read the following policies and sign at the end: 1. Rules and Regulations Agreement 2. Dress Code for ECSP 3. Transportation requirements 4. Medical Consent Form 5. Release Form 1. Rules & Regulations Agreement During the past 20 years, hundreds of high school students from all over the country have participated in a Christendom Summer Program. Many of them have said that the program was a life-changing experience as it offered them an opportunity to grow in their understanding of the Catholic Faith, to experience the joy of Christian fellowship, and to make friends for life. Due to our increasingly secular society, we are experiencing an insensitivity to many Christian values and aspects of Catholic teaching. At Christendom College, we endeavor to find and affirm the good in the midst of the challenges of modern culture. In order for our Summer Program participants to more fully immerse themselves in the Christendom experience, we require that they abide by the following rules and regulations, which serve as aids to living a truly Catholic life: 1. Practice Christian Charity: Treat all those around you with respect, honesty, charity and courtesy. This eliminates such behaviors as disrespect, bad language (cussing, swearing, cursing, profanity), gossiping, exclusivity, etc. The practice of Christian charity also includes chastity and appropriate physical interaction. Students are expected to refrain from any inappropriate and unchaste physical conduct during their time in the Program. Such behavior may be a ground for discipline and dismissal from the Program. Further, any sexual harassment or contact may also result in the involvement of law enforcement and reports to appropriate authorities where required, in addition to dismissal.
    [Show full text]
  • Søren Kierkegaard's View of Faith Found in Fear And
    SØREN KIERKEGAARD’S VIEW OF FAITH FOUND IN FEAR AND TREMBLING AND PRACTICE IN CHRISTIANITY David Pulliam Submitted to the faculty of the University Graduate School in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts in the Department of Philosophy Indiana University September 2016 ii Accepted by the Graduate Faculty, Indiana University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts. Master’s Thesis Committee __________________________________ Dr. Samuel J.M. Khan, PhD __________________________________ Dr. Cornelis de Waal, PhD __________________________________ Dr. David Pfeifer, PhD iii David Pulliam Søren Kierkegaard’s view of Faith found in Fear and Trembling and Practice in Christianity In this paper I discuss two key works written by Søren Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling and Practice in Christianity, under the pseudonyms Johannes de Silentio and Anti-Climacus respectively. I focus on three questions: what is Johannes view of faith, what is Anti-Climacus’ view of faith and how are these Kierkegaard’s conclusions? I argue that stemming from Johannes’ and Anti-Climacus’ points of view, Kierkegaard’s view of faith is the aligning of the self in a trusting relationship with the God-man. One outside of faith can perceive faith to be a paradox or find faith offensive; one must have faith to avoid offense and overcome the paradox. Chapter 1 focuses on the connection between Kierkegaard and his pseudonyms using his work The Point of View. In this chapter I map out Kierkegaard’s method of communication and the purpose for his use of pseudonyms. Chapter 2 focuses on Johannes’ view of faith in Fear and Trembling.
    [Show full text]
  • Militant Liturgies: Practicing Christianity with Kierkegaard, Bonhoeffer, and Weil
    religions Article Militant Liturgies: Practicing Christianity with Kierkegaard, Bonhoeffer, and Weil J. Aaron Simmons Department of Philosophy, Furman University, Greenville, SC 29613, USA; [email protected] Abstract: Traditional philosophy of religion has tended to focus on the doxastic dimension of religious life, which although a vitally important area of research, has often come at the cost of philosophical engagements with religious practice. Focusing particularly on Christian traditions, this essay offers a sustained reflection on one particular model of embodied Christian practice as presented in the work of Søren Kierkegaard. After a discussion of different notions of practice and perfection, the paper turns to Kierkegaard’s conception of the two churches: the Church Triumphant and the Church Militant. Then, in light of Kierkegaard’s defense of the latter and critique of the former, it is shown that Kierkegaard’s specific account gets appropriated and expanded in Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s account of “costly grace” and “religionless Christianity,” and Simone Weil’s conception of “afflicted love.” Ultimately, it is suggested that these three thinkers jointly present a notion of “militant liturgies” that offers critical and constructive resources for contemporary philosophy of religion. Keywords: Kierkegaard; Bonhoeffer; Weil; philosophy of religion; liturgy; practice; Christianity Citation: Simmons, J. Aaron. 2021. 1. Introduction Militant Liturgies: Practicing It is often the case that philosophical discussions of Christianity overstate the unity Christianity with Kierkegaard, Bonhoeffer, and Weil. Religions 12: by which the Christian traditions operate. In the name of referential precision, perhaps 340. https://doi.org/10.3390/ we should only ever speak of “Christianities” or, as this special issue theme admirably rel12050340 does, “Christian traditions”.
    [Show full text]
  • Causes and Consequences of the Protestant Reformation Sascha O
    Chapman University Chapman University Digital Commons ESI Working Papers Economic Science Institute 2016 Causes and Consequences of the Protestant Reformation Sascha O. Becker University of Warwick Steven Pfaff University of Washington Jared Rubin Chapman University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/esi_working_papers Part of the Christian Denominations and Sects Commons, Christianity Commons, Econometrics Commons, Economic Theory Commons, History of Christianity Commons, and the Other Economics Commons Recommended Citation Becker, S.O., Pfaff, S., & Rubin, J. (2016). Causes and consequences of the Protestant Reformation. ESI Working Paper 16-13. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/esi_working_papers/178 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Economic Science Institute at Chapman University Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in ESI Working Papers by an authorized administrator of Chapman University Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Causes and Consequences of the Protestant Reformation Comments Working Paper 16-13 This article is available at Chapman University Digital Commons: http://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/esi_working_papers/178 Causes and Consequences of the Protestant Reformation* Sascha O. Becker† Steven Pfaff‡ University of Warwick University of Washington Jared Rubin§ Chapman University The Protestant Reformation is one of the defining events of the last millennium. Nearly 500 years after the Reformation, its causes and consequences have seen a renewed interest in the social sciences. Research in economics, sociology, and political science increasingly uses detailed individual-level, city-level, and regional-level data to identify drivers of the adoption of the Reformation, its diffusion pattern, and its socioeconomic consequences.
    [Show full text]
  • Community in the Theology of Søren Aabye Kierkegaard
    College of Saint Benedict and Saint John's University DigitalCommons@CSB/SJU School of Theology and Seminary Graduate Papers/Theses School of Theology and Seminary 2008 Community in the Theology of Søren Aabye Kierkegaard Nicholas Coffman College of Saint Benedict/Saint John's University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.csbsju.edu/sot_papers Part of the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Coffman, Nicholas, "Community in the Theology of Søren Aabye Kierkegaard" (2008). School of Theology and Seminary Graduate Papers/Theses. 751. https://digitalcommons.csbsju.edu/sot_papers/751 This Graduate Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Theology and Seminary at DigitalCommons@CSB/SJU. It has been accepted for inclusion in School of Theology and Seminary Graduate Papers/Theses by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@CSB/SJU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Community in the Theology of Søren Aabye Kierkegaard by Nicholas Coffman 2720 Beartooth Drive Billings, MT 59102 USA A Paper Submitted to the Faculty of the School of Theology ·Seminary of Saint John’s University, Collegeville, Minnesota, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Systematic Theology. SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY · SEMINARY Saint John’s University Collegeville, Minnesota 6.10.08 2 This paper was written under the direction of ____________________________________ Dr. Bill Cahoy, Dean, St. John’s School of Theology Director 6.10.2008 3 Community in the Theology of Søren Aabye Kierkegaard Description: This work began as a term paper for an Independent Learning Project with Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • A Philosophical Audacity
    A Philosophical Audacity Barth’s Notion of Experience Between Neo-Kantianism and Nietzsche1 Anthony Feneuil [email protected] This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: “A Philosophical Audacity: Barth’s Notion of Experience Between Neo-Kantianism and Nietzsche“, which has been published in final form at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ijst.12077/full. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance With Wiley Terms and Conditions for self-archiving Abstract: This article addresses Barth’s dialectical notion of experience in the 1920s. I argue that the theoretical problem raised by recent studies on Barth’s notion of experience after his break with liberalism (i.e., the apparent inconsistency between Barth’s move towards an increasingly neo-Kantian understanding of experience and his emphasis on the existential and psychological dimensions of experience) can be solved by the hypothesis of a Nietzschean influence on Barth's epistemology in the 1920s. I defend not only the historical plausibility but also the conceptual fecundity of such a hypothesis, which casts a new light on Barth’s relation to philosophy and the notion of experience, and lays the basis for a consistent Barthian theology of experience. *** Theology is not a discreet slice of knowledge you could simply add to one philosophy or other. It exists nowhere but through philosophy, and that is why Barth’s theological innovation cannot manifest itself apart from philosophical innovation. Barth is not a philosopher, and he does not explicitly develop his concepts in a philosophical way. But Barth repeatedly claims we cannot grant theology an extraordinary status among human discourses.
    [Show full text]
  • Kierkegaard and Anti-Rationalism
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Asbury Theological Seminary Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers Volume 13 Issue 2 Article 5 4-1-1996 The Offense of Reason and the Passion of Faith: Kierkegaard and Anti-Rationalism Karen L. Carr Follow this and additional works at: https://place.asburyseminary.edu/faithandphilosophy Recommended Citation Carr, Karen L. (1996) "The Offense of Reason and the Passion of Faith: Kierkegaard and Anti-Rationalism," Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers: Vol. 13 : Iss. 2 , Article 5. Available at: https://place.asburyseminary.edu/faithandphilosophy/vol13/iss2/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at ePLACE: preserving, learning, and creative exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers by an authorized editor of ePLACE: preserving, learning, and creative exchange. THE OFFENSE OF REASON AND THE PASSION OF FAITH: KIERKEGAARD AND ANTI-RATIONALISM Karen L. Carr This essay considers and reject~ both the irrationalist and the supra-ratio­ nalist interpretations of Kierkegaard, arguing that a new category­ Kierkegaard as "anti-rationalist" -is needed. The irrationalist reading overemphasizes the subjectivism of Kierkegaard's thought, while the supra­ rationalist reading underemphasizes the degree of tension between human reason (as corrupted by the will's desire to be autonomous and self-sustain­ ing) and Christian faith. An anti-rationalist reading, I argue, is both faith­ ful to Kierkegaard's metaphysical and alethiological realism, on the one hand, and his emphasis on the continuing opposition between reason and faith, on the other, as manifested in the ongoing possibility of offense (rea­ son's rejection of the Christian message) in the life of the Christian.
    [Show full text]
  • The Authenticity of Faith in Kierkegaard's Philosophy
    The Authenticity of Faith in Kierkegaard’s Philosophy The Authenticity of Faith in Kierkegaard’s Philosophy Edited by Tamar Aylat-Yaguri and Jon Stewart The Authenticity of Faith in Kierkegaard’s Philosophy, Edited by Tamar Aylat-Yaguri and Jon Stewart This book first published 2013 Cambridge Scholars Publishing Layout and cover design by K.Nun Design, Denmark 12 Back Chapman Street, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2XX, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2013 by Tamar Aylat-Yaguri, Jon Stewart and contributors All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-4438-4990-1, ISBN (13): 978-1-4438-4990-6 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Contributors vi Introduction vii Acknowledgements xvi List of Abbreviations xvii Chapter One Jacob Golomb: Was Kierkegaard an Authentic Believer? 1 Chapter Two Shai Frogel: Acoustical Illusion as Self-Deception 12 Chapter Three Roi Benbassat: Faith as a Struggle against Ethical Self-Deception 18 Chapter Four Edward F. Mooney: A Faith that Defies Self-Deception 27 Chapter Five Darío González: Faith and the Uncertainty of Historical Experience 38 Chapter Six Jerome (Yehuda) Gellman: Constancy of Faith? Symmetry and Asymmetry in Kierkegaard’s Leap of Faith 49 Chapter Seven Peter Šajda: Does Anti-Climacus’ Ethical-Religious Theory of Selfhood Imply a Discontinuity of the Self? 60 Chapter Eight Tamar Aylat-Yaguri: Being in Truth and Being a Jew: Kierkegaard’s View of Judaism 68 Chapter Nine Jon Stewart, Kierkegaard and Hegel on Faith and Knowledge 77 Notes 93 CONTRIBUTORS Tamar Aylat-Yaguri, Department of Philosophy, Tel-Aviv University, Ramat-Aviv, P.O.B 39040, Tel-Aviv 61390, Israel.
    [Show full text]
  • Interpreting the Theology of Barth in Light of Nietzsche's Dictum “God Is Dead”
    Interpreting the theology of Barth in light of Nietzsche’s dictum “God is dead” André J Groenewald Pastor: Presbyterian Church of Scotland Edinburgh, Scotland Abstract Karl Barth responded with his theology to Nietzsche’s dictum “God is dead” by stating that God is the living God. God does not need the human race to exist. God reveals God self to humankind whenever God wills. Barth agreed with Nietzsche that the god of the nineteenth century was a “Nicht-Gott”. The article aims to discus Karl Barth’s respons to Nietzsche’s impulse towards the development of a concept of God that would lead to neither atheism nor theism. The article argues that Barth paved the way for talking about God by defining God as the “communicative God”. 1. INTRODUCTION In his book, Die fröhliche Wissenschaft, originally written in 1882, Nietzsche tells about a mad man who runs around in a marketplace looking for “God” (Nietzsche 1973:159). Since he cannot find God, he can only reach one conclusion. God is dead! Nietzsche did not per se deny or affirm the existence of God. He announced the death of the god of modernity (Ward [1997] 1998:xxix; Groenewald 2005:146). He had a problem with the notion of “Fortschritt” according to which history has proven that human beings develop to greater heights of their own accord and that the potential for progress is intrinsic to humankind (Nietzsche 1969a:169; 1972: 304, 309, 310; see Jensen 2006:47, 51). “God’s existence and providence could then be proven on account of this optimistic progress in the course of history” (Groenewald 2005:146).
    [Show full text]
  • Post-Christendom, Post-Constantinian, Post-Christian…Does the Label Matter?
    Post-Christendom, Post-Constantinian, Post-Christian…does the label matter? Post-Christendom The term ‘post-Christendom’ has become increasingly familiar in conversations about church and mission in contemporary western societies. Some first encountered this term in the ‘After Christendom’ series, published by Paternoster and written by members of the Anabaptist Network since 2004. 1 These books offer resources to help us understand and engage creatively with the challenges and opportunities of post-Christendom culture. But many others are also using this language, and have done so for many years, even if its significance has not been widely recognised until quite recently. ‘Post-Christendom’ appears to be a significant lens through which to view the emerging cultural landscape. However, different people use the term ‘post-Christendom’ in different ways. Sometimes this helps us engage with the issues we face; but sometimes it simply causes confusion. In the emerging church conversation, for instance, ‘post-Christendom’ is often used as if it were a synonym for post-modernity. Understanding and engaging with post-modernity is undoubtedly important, but referring to this as ‘post-Christendom’ does not aid clarity of thinking. The transition from modernity to post-modernity and from Christendom to post- Christendom confronts us with a cultural and missional ‘double whammy’. These shifts overlap, complement and reinforce each other in various ways, so we do need to explore their inter-relationship and dual impact. But post-Christendom is not the same as post- modernity. Post-Christendom presents different challenges and opportunities. The first book in the ‘After Christendom’ series offered a definition of post-Christendom: the culture that emerges as the Christian faith loses coherence within a society that has been definitively shaped by the Christian story and as the institutions that have been developed to express Christian convictions decline in influence.
    [Show full text]