Inverse Versus Dialectical Theology: The Two Faces of Negativity and the Miracle of Faith

2021 ◽  
pp. 466-512
Author(s):  
Hent de Vries
Keyword(s):  
Dialectical Theology

scholarly journals Between the Times – and Sometimes Beyond: An Essay in Dialectical Theology and its Critique of Religion and “Religion”

Open Theology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 475-495
Author(s):  
Hartmut von Sass
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Account ◽  
Dialectical Theology ◽  
The Times ◽  
Critique Of Religion

AbstractThis paper gives a systematic account of Dialectical Theology (DT) and its surprisingly ramified usage of the concept of religion on the backdrop of recent debates about the “return of religion.” First, the positional context between Schleiermacher and Barth is sketched. Second, the highly divergent positions of Bultmann, Barth, Brunner as well as Gogarten and Tillich are presented – always in regard to their sometimes programmatic, sometimes rather hidden references to “religion” between its facticity and normativity. Third and by way of conclusion, it is suggested to restrict “religion” as a concept to non-theological disciplines, i.e., to treat “religion” as a strictly empirical and sociological term, whereas theology is concerned with faith that belongs to a very different game than religion, as DT helps to clarify.

„Zurück zu Schleiermacher! und von Schleiermacher aus vorwärts!“

2012 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Brent A. R. Hege
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
World War I ◽  
The State ◽  
World War ◽  
Psychological Method ◽  
Dialectical Theology ◽  
Complex Picture ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of

AbstractAs dialectical theology rose to prominence in the years following World War I, the new theologians sought to distance themselves from liberalism in a number of ways, an important one being a rejection of Schleiermacher’s methods and conclusions. In reading the history of Weimar-era theology as it has been written in the twentieth century one would be forgiven for assuming that Schleiermacher found no defenders during this time, as liberal theology quietly faded into the twilight. However, a closer examination of this period reveals a different story. The last generation of liberal theologians consistently appealed to Schleiermacher for support and inspiration, perhaps none more so than Georg Wobbermin, whom B. A. Gerrish has called a “captain of the liberal rearguard.” Wobbermin sought to construct a religio-psychological method on the basis of Schleiermacher’s definition of religion and on his “Copernican turn” toward the subject and resolutely defended such a method against the new dialectical theology long after liberal theology’s supposed demise. A consideration of Wobbermin’s appeals to Schleiermacher in his defense of the liberal program reveals a more complex picture of the state of theology in the Weimar period and of Schleiermacher’s legacy in German Protestant thought.

Incarnation as Awakening: Katsumi Takizawa Reading Karl Barth

Exchange ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 144-155
Author(s):  
Susanne Hennecke
Keyword(s):  
Karl Barth ◽  
The Other ◽  
Historical Jesus ◽  
Kyoto School ◽  
Dialectical Theology ◽  
Christian Theologian ◽  
The One ◽  
Open Question

AbstractThis contribution deals with the thinking of the Buddhist philosopher and Christian theologian Katsumi Takizawa (1909-1984) on incarnation. Firstly, it gives a short biographical and theological introduction to Takizawa, who was influenced not only by the "father" of the so-called dialectical theology, Karl Barth, but also by one of the famous figures of the Kyoto-school, the philosopher Kitaro Nishida.This contribution concentrates, secondly, on Takizawa's the-anthropological re-interpretation of the incarnation. It is argued that for Takizawa incarnation has to be seen as an awakening of the historical Jesus (or other historical phenomena) to what he calls the original fact: the eternal relationship between God and man.Thirdly, this contribution discusses the the-anthropological thinking of Takizawa about incarnation in five short points. Apart from the positive challenges of Takizawa's thinking especially for the theology of Karl Barth, it marks clearly the most thrilling point between Takizawa's thinking on the one side and that of scholars in Barthian theology on the other side. The open question that comes up is if incarnation really can be thought without a historical mediation or mediator, as Takizawa seems to claim.

scholarly journals Inclusive Quarantine: The Pathology and Performance of Jewish Existence in the Erlangen Opinion on the Aryan Paragraph

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan Tafilowski
Keyword(s):  
National Socialist ◽  
German State ◽  
Binary Model ◽  
Dialectical Theology ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Jewish Christians ◽  
The Church ◽  
Mortal Danger

The Erlangen Opinion on the Aryan Paragraph, co-authored by Lutheran theologians Paul Althaus and Werner Elert, has proven controversial. Scholars have typically interpreted the document’s recommendation regarding the place of Jewish Christians in the church according to an inclusion/exclusion binary model. However, the Erlangen Opinion actually reflects a dialectical theology of Jewish existence that Althaus had developed during the Weimar years. Following this dialectic of pathology and performance, Althaus envisions neither the total inclusion nor total inclusion of Jews in the German state church. Rather, he proposes an inclusive quarantine of Jewish persons, who represent both a mortal danger to and indispensable factor for all communities—both societal and ecclesial. By probing the logic of this important artifact of Protestant theology’s complicated relationship to National Socialist ideology, the article sheds light on the ambivalent nature of Christian anti-Judaism and antisemitism.

scholarly journals Demythologization and existential theology: formation of paradigm

2018 ◽  
pp. 42-53
Author(s):  
Yuliya Strielkova
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Language Practices ◽  
Scientific World ◽  
Dialectical Theology ◽  
The World ◽  
Sacred Scripture

The author Strielkova Yuliya A. in the article «Demythologization and existential theology: formation of paradigm» analyzed the conception of the demythologization of Sacred Scripture and Sacred translation as a fundamental setting not only within the dialectical theology of the twentieth century, but also for contemporary searches for the forms of correlation of philosophy and theology in the context of the scientific world pictur. The author outlines the heuristic potential of a reinterpretative approach to the concept of demythologization, considered beyond the conceptual and chronological framework of dialectical theology. Also, attention was focused on clarifying the heuristic content of the concept of "demythologization" for the modern philosophical and theological tradition, as well as the nature of its genetic connection with the existential paradigm of philosophizing and christology. Particular attention is paid to the paradigmatic and formative aspects of the phenomenon of demythologization; the role of language practices and discursive models in the development of the contemporary picture of the world is accentuated 

scholarly journals Aðferð eða opinberun? Ritdeila Adolfs von Harnack og Karls Barth 1923. Þýðing með inngangi og skýringum

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haraldur Hreinsson
Keyword(s):  
Present Article ◽  
20Th Century ◽  
Karl Barth ◽  
Dialectical Theology

In early 1923, a correspondence between the theologians Adolf von Harnack (1851–1930) and Karl Barth (1886–1968) appeared in the German theological journal Christliche Welt. Respectively, Harnack and Barth represented two of the most prominent post-Enlighten-ment theological currents. At the time, Harnack was widely regarded as the leading voice of theological liberalism while Barth was seen as the champion of neo-orthodoxy or dialectical theology, a theological movement on the rise. The correspondence attracted much attention and still today it is seen amongst the most important theological debates of the 20th century. The present article contains a translation of the original 15 questions posed by Harnack and Barth’s answers to them and a commentary on the debate.

scholarly journals Sidang Ilahi Elohim Dalam Mazmur 82:1

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marthin Steven Lumingkewas ◽  
Firman Panjaitan
Keyword(s):  
Old Testament ◽  
Hebrew Bible ◽  
Hebrew Text ◽  
The Other ◽  
Main Method ◽  
Religious System ◽  
Dialectical Theology ◽  
Ancient Israel ◽  
Divine Council ◽  
Religious Systems

In the Old Testament Yahweh is frequently called El. The question is raised whether Yahweh was a form of the god El from the beginning or whether they were separate deities who only became equated later. They whom uphold theory Yahweh and El were conceived as separate deities holds that Yahweh was a southern storm god from Seir and so on, which was brought by the Israelites and conflated with the Jerusalem patriarchal deity.On the other side there are scholars who hold and conceived Yahweh and El as one single deity. These scholars defend this position most commonly on the grounds that no distinction between the two can be clearly found in the Hebrew Bible. The methodology used in this paper is literary – historical and social interpretations, with the main method being the "diachronic and dialectical theology of Hegel". The simple Hegelian method is: A (thesis) versus B (anti-thesis) equals C (synthesis). The author analyzes (thesis) by collecting instruments related to ancient Semitic religions; it includes data on El and Yahweh assembly obtained from Hebrew text sources and extra-biblical manuscripts which are then processed in depth. The antithesis is to analyze El's assembly development in Israel – especially in Psalm 82. While the synthesis appears in the nuances of the El’s assembly believe in ancient Israel. The focus of this paper's research is to prove 2 things: first, is Psalm 82: 1, is an Israeli Psalm that uses the patterns and forms of the Canaanite Psalms; especially regarding religious systems that use the terminology of the divine council. Second, to prove that El and Yahweh in the context of this Psalm are two different gods, of which this view contradicts several ANET experts such as Michael S, Heisser who sets El and Yahweh in this text as identical gods. The results of this study attempt to prove that Israel and the Canaan contextually share the same religious system, and are seen to be separated in the Deuteronomist era with their Yahwistic reforms.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document