Religiöser Universalismus im Zeitalter der Nation. Friedrich von Hügel und die deutsche Geisteswelt (Eucken, Troeltsch, Naumann)

The article analyzes the influence of German thought on Baron Friedrich von Hügel’s philosophy of religion. The activities of the British scholar in the networks of Catholic modernism are placed within the broader framework of the international discussion on religion around 1900. His religious universalism was shaped to a great extent by the encounter of German intellectuals from a liberal Protestant background, most notably by Rudolf Eucken, Ernst Troeltsch and Friedrich Naumann. This encounter, started during the 1890s, focussed on the concepts of historical individuality and historical development. It took a new direction with the public role adopted by German intellectuals in the propaganda of the World War. Von Hügel’s often ignored treatise The German Soul reacted to the fusion of liberal religious thought with German nationalism as observed in Troeltsch and Naumann. His criticism of a lack of „international morality“ of German thought and his approach to identify the reason for this deficit in the Lutheran and idealistic tradition shed light on the ongoing discussions of a „Sonderweg“ of German thought. Von Hügel’s late attempts to promote Christianity as an anti-nationalist force remind of other more theological rejections of nationalism after the war. However, these attempts are not based on a strict theological or confessional rationale (like in dialectical theology) but try to continue the interconfessional and interdisciplinary discussion of the beginning of the century. This is revealed best by von Hügel’s close but not uncritical relationship to Troeltsch in the early 1920s.

“Not a Stone Left Standing”

In 1920, it became clear to Barth that in his Epistle to the Romans he had taken for granted that he knew something of God, and he concluded that he needed to rewrite the entire work. He now stressed even more that there is no passage from human beings to God. Even when God is revealed, God does not enter this world. God is known in Jesus Christ as the unknown God. Human faith is the impossible possibility. This new version drew widespread attention, both critical and supportive, in the theological world. The 1923 controversy between Barth and Harnack was representative of the critical reactions. Barth began to clarify his Dialectical Theology in several lectures. For a few years, Barth worked with several other theologians, esp. Brunner, Bultmann, Gogarten, Thurneysen. This work gave Dialectical Theology new prominence and impact.

An Encounter and Its Impact: The Visit of John R. Mott in Cluj-Napoca/Kolozsvár and His Impression Upon László Ravasz

In this paper I examine one of the effects of László Ravasz’s (1882-1975) theological thinking, former professor of Practical Theology at Protestant Theological Institute, Kolzosvár-Cluj-Napoca, namely the development of his spiritual life and its impact on his theological scientific position. Due to the limitations of the scope of this paper, I could present the less well-known views of Ravasz’s work on the mission. John R. Mott’s lecture in Kolozsvár-Cluj-Napoca provides, among others, the certainty that in the modern theoretical approach of the young Ravasz he approached the tasks of pastoral ministry, preaching, dissemination of the gospel, theological education in a modern and actual way. This notion was not perfect, but it helped to bring about a new impetus for the Hungarian Protestant worldview that was stuck in rationalism and liberalism, and for the value theology to constitute a positive transition to the dialectical theology. Ravasz was an authentic representative of this transition.

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

This 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.

Sidang Ilahi Elohim Dalam Mazmur 82:1

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.

What has Basel to do with Epworth? Karl Barth on Pietism and the theology of the Reformation

This article examines Karl Barth's earliest engagements with Pietism, rationalism and liberal Protestantism against the backdrop of the theologies of Albrecht Ritschl and Wilhelm Herrmann. The analysis then follows Barth through his rejection of liberal theology and his development of a dialectical theology over against Wilhelm Herrmann and with particular reference to Martin Luther's theologia crucis. The article concludes by examining Barth's comments on religious experience to a group of Methodist pastors in Switzerland in 1961.