Saturday, June 20, 2015
Death of God Theology and oither Wikipedia pages reposted in bold and italicized print
Jewish atheism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Part of a series on
Atheism
Atheismsymbol endorsed by AAI.svg
Concepts ·
History
[show]
Types[hide]
Implicit and explicit
Negative and positive
Christian ·
Hindu ·
Jewish
State atheism
Arguments for atheism[show]
People[show]
Related stances[show]
Portal icon Atheism portal ·
WikiProject
v ·
t ·
e
Jewish atheism refers to the atheism of people who are ethnically and (at least to some extent) culturally Jewish. Because Jewishness encompasses ethnic as well as religious components, the term "Jewish atheism" does not necessarily imply a contradiction. Based on Jewish law's emphasis on matrilineal descent, even religiously conservative Orthodox Jewish authorities would accept an atheist born to a Jewish mother as fully Jewish.[1] A 2011 study found that half of all American Jews have doubts about the existence of God, compared to 10–15% of other American religious groups.[2]
Contents [hide]
1 Organized Jewish life
2 Jewish theology
3 Secular Jewish culture
4 Notable people
5 See also
6 Notes
Organized Jewish life[edit]
There has been a phenomenon of atheistic and secular Jewish organizations, mostly in the past century, from the Jewish socialist Bund in early twentieth-century Poland to the modern Congress of Secular Jewish Organizations and the Society for Humanistic Judaism in the United States. Many Jewish atheists feel comfortable within any of the three major non-Orthodox Jewish denominations (Reform, Conservative, and Reconstructionist). This presents less of a contradiction than might first seem apparent, given Judaism's emphasis on practice over belief, with even mainstream guides to Judaism suggesting that belief in God is not a necessary prerequisite to Jewish observance.[3] However, Orthodox Judaism regards the acceptance of the "Yoke of Heaven" (the sovereignty of the God of Israel in the world and the divine origin of the Torah) as a fundamental obligation for Jews. Even among non-Orthodox Jews, espousing atheism remains problematic outside of the Congress of Secular Jewish Organizations and the Society for Humanistic Judaism. The Reform movement, for example, has rejected efforts at affiliation by atheistic temples.[4] The presence of atheists in all denominations of modern Judaism, from Secular Humanistic Judaism to Orthodoxy, has been noted.[5]
Jewish theology[edit]
Much recent Jewish theology makes few if any metaphysical claims and is thus compatible with atheism on an ontological level. The founder of Reconstructionist Judaism, Mordechai Kaplan, espoused a naturalistic definition of God, while some post-Holocaust theology has also eschewed a personal god.[6] The Jewish philosopher Howard Wettstein has advanced a non-metaphysical approach to religious commitment, according to which metaphysical theism-atheism is not the issue.[7] Harold Schulweis, a Conservative rabbi trained in the Reconstructionist tradition, has argued that Jewish theology should move from a focus on God to an emphasis on "godliness." This "predicate theology", while continuing to use theistic language, again makes few metaphysical claims that non-believers would find objectionable.[8]
However, some Jewish atheists remain deeply uncomfortable with the use of any kind of theistic language. For such Jews traditional practice and symbolism can still retain powerful meaning. They may continue to engage in Jewish rituals such as the lighting of Shabbat candles and find meaning in many aspects of Jewish culture and religion. For example, to an atheist Jew, the Menorah might represent the power of the Jewish spirit or stand as a symbol of the fight against assimilation. No mention of a divine force in Jewish history would be accepted literally; the Torah may be viewed as a common mythology of the Jewish people, not a faith document or correct history.[citation needed]
Secular Jewish culture[edit]
See also: Jewish secularism
Many Jewish atheists would reject even this level of ritualized and symbolic identification, instead embracing a thoroughgoing secularism and basing their Jewishness entirely in ethnicity and secular Jewish culture. Possibilities for secular Jewishness include an identification with Jewish history and peoplehood, immersion in Jewish literature (including such non-religious Jewish authors as Philip Roth and Amos Oz), the consumption of Jewish food, the use of Jewish humor, and an attachment to Jewish languages such as Yiddish, Hebrew or Ladino. A high percentage of Israelis identify themselves as secular, rejecting the practice of the Jewish religion (see Religion in Israel). While some non-believers of Jewish ancestry do not consider themselves Jews, preferring to define themselves solely as atheists, some would argue that Judaism is arguably a culture and tradition that one can easily embrace without religious faith, despite Jewish culture revolving around God.[neutrality is disputed][9]
Notable people[edit]
See also: List of Jewish atheists
Historically, many well-known Jews have rejected a belief in deities. Some have denied the existence of a traditional deity while continuing to use religious language. In 1656 the seventeenth-century Jewish philosopher Baruch Spinoza was excommunicated by Amsterdam's Sephardic synagogue after advancing a pantheist notion of God that, according to some observers, is both compatible with and paved the way for modern atheism.[10] Deeply influenced by Spinoza, Albert Einstein used theistic language and identified strongly as a Jew, while rejecting the notion of a personal god.[11] The astrophysicist Carl Sagan was born into a Jewish family and was a non-theist.[12]
Karl Marx was born into an ethnically Jewish family but raised as a Lutheran, and is among the most notable and influential atheist thinkers of modern history; he developed dialectical and historical materialism which became the basis for his critique of capitalism and his theories of scientific socialism. Marx became a major influence among other prominent Jewish intellectuals including Moses Hess. In one of his most cited comments on religion he stated: "Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people".
Many other famous Jews have wholeheartedly embraced atheism, rejecting religiosity altogether. Sigmund Freud penned The Future of an Illusion, in which he both eschewed religious belief and outlined its origins and prospects. At the same time he urged a Jewish colleague to raise his son within the Jewish religion, arguing that "If you do not let your son grow up as a Jew, you will deprive him of those sources of energy which cannot be replaced by anything else."[13] The anarchist Emma Goldman was born to an Orthodox Jewish family and rejected belief in God, while the Israeli prime minister Golda Meir, when asked if she believed in God, answered "I believe in the Jewish people, and the Jewish people believe in God."[14] More recently, the French Jewish philosopher Jacques Derrida stated somewhat cryptically, "I rightly pass for an atheist".[15] In the world of entertainment, Woody Allen has made a career out of the tension between his Jewishness and religious doubt ("Not only is there no God, but try getting a plumber on weekends").[16]
See also[edit]
Conversion to Judaism
Christianity and Judaism
Ethical Culture
Haskalah
Humanistic Judaism
Jewish Bolshevism
Jews in apostasy
Schisms among the Jews
Who is a Jew?
Notes[edit]
1.Jump up ^ What Makes a Jew "Jewish"? – Jewish Identity
2.Jump up ^ Winston, Kimberly (September 26, 2011). "Judaism without God? Yes, say American atheists". USA Today. Retrieved July 14, 2013.
3.Jump up ^ See, for example: Daniel Septimus, Must a Jew Believe in God?
4.Jump up ^ "Reform Jews Reject a Temple Without God", New York Times, June 13, 1994.
5.Jump up ^ Berlinerblau, Jacques. "In Praise of Jewish Atheism". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on March 13, 2012.
6.Jump up ^ See, for example, Mordechai Kaplan, The Meaning of God in Modern Jewish Religion (New York: Behrman’s Jewish book house, 1937); Richard Rubenstein, After Auschwitz: Radical Theology and Contemporary Judaism (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1966).[page needed]
7.Jump up ^ Howard Wettstein, The Significance of Religious Experience (Oxford University Press, 2012)[page needed]
8.Jump up ^ See Harold M. Schulweis. Evil and the Morality of God (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 1984);[page needed] For Those Who Can't Believe : Overcoming the Obstacles to Faith (Harper Perennial, 1995).[page needed]
9.Jump up ^ An example of an atheist rejecting Jewish identification is cited in "Hipster Antisemitism," Zeek, January 2005
10.Jump up ^ Christopher Hitchens, ed., The Portable Atheist (Philadelphia: Da Capo Press, 2007), 21.
11.Jump up ^ "The Religious Non-believer: Einstein and his God", Moment, April 2007.
12.Jump up ^ Sagan, Carl (February 12, 1986). "Chapter 23". Broca's Brain: Reflections on the Romance of Science. Ballantine Books. p. 330. ISBN 0-345-33689-5.
13.Jump up ^ David S. Ariel, What Do Jews Believe? (New York: Shocken Books, 1995), 248.
14.Jump up ^ See Emma Goldman, "The Philosophy of Atheism," in Christopher Hitchens, ed., The Portable Atheist (Philadelphia: Da Capo Press, 2007), 129–33; Golda Meir is quoted by Jonathan Rosen in "So Was It Odd of God?", The New York Times, December 14, 2003.
15.Jump up ^ Scott Mclemee (October 11, 2004). "Jacques Derrida, Thinker Who Influenced and Infuriated a Range of Humanistic Fields, Dies at 74". Chronicle of Higher Education. Archived from the original on February 6, 2006.
16.Jump up ^ Woody Allen Quotes – The Quotations Page
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Jews and Judaism
Category
Portal
WikiProject
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Irreligion
Categories: Atheism
Jewish atheists
Secular Jewish culture
Disengagement from religion
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Català
Español
فارسی
Français
עברית
Ladino
Português
Edit links
This page was last modified on 2 June 2015, at 19:33.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_atheism
Jewish atheism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Part of a series on
Atheism
Atheismsymbol endorsed by AAI.svg
Concepts ·
History
[show]
Types[hide]
Implicit and explicit
Negative and positive
Christian ·
Hindu ·
Jewish
State atheism
Arguments for atheism[show]
People[show]
Related stances[show]
Portal icon Atheism portal ·
WikiProject
v ·
t ·
e
Jewish atheism refers to the atheism of people who are ethnically and (at least to some extent) culturally Jewish. Because Jewishness encompasses ethnic as well as religious components, the term "Jewish atheism" does not necessarily imply a contradiction. Based on Jewish law's emphasis on matrilineal descent, even religiously conservative Orthodox Jewish authorities would accept an atheist born to a Jewish mother as fully Jewish.[1] A 2011 study found that half of all American Jews have doubts about the existence of God, compared to 10–15% of other American religious groups.[2]
Contents [hide]
1 Organized Jewish life
2 Jewish theology
3 Secular Jewish culture
4 Notable people
5 See also
6 Notes
Organized Jewish life[edit]
There has been a phenomenon of atheistic and secular Jewish organizations, mostly in the past century, from the Jewish socialist Bund in early twentieth-century Poland to the modern Congress of Secular Jewish Organizations and the Society for Humanistic Judaism in the United States. Many Jewish atheists feel comfortable within any of the three major non-Orthodox Jewish denominations (Reform, Conservative, and Reconstructionist). This presents less of a contradiction than might first seem apparent, given Judaism's emphasis on practice over belief, with even mainstream guides to Judaism suggesting that belief in God is not a necessary prerequisite to Jewish observance.[3] However, Orthodox Judaism regards the acceptance of the "Yoke of Heaven" (the sovereignty of the God of Israel in the world and the divine origin of the Torah) as a fundamental obligation for Jews. Even among non-Orthodox Jews, espousing atheism remains problematic outside of the Congress of Secular Jewish Organizations and the Society for Humanistic Judaism. The Reform movement, for example, has rejected efforts at affiliation by atheistic temples.[4] The presence of atheists in all denominations of modern Judaism, from Secular Humanistic Judaism to Orthodoxy, has been noted.[5]
Jewish theology[edit]
Much recent Jewish theology makes few if any metaphysical claims and is thus compatible with atheism on an ontological level. The founder of Reconstructionist Judaism, Mordechai Kaplan, espoused a naturalistic definition of God, while some post-Holocaust theology has also eschewed a personal god.[6] The Jewish philosopher Howard Wettstein has advanced a non-metaphysical approach to religious commitment, according to which metaphysical theism-atheism is not the issue.[7] Harold Schulweis, a Conservative rabbi trained in the Reconstructionist tradition, has argued that Jewish theology should move from a focus on God to an emphasis on "godliness." This "predicate theology", while continuing to use theistic language, again makes few metaphysical claims that non-believers would find objectionable.[8]
However, some Jewish atheists remain deeply uncomfortable with the use of any kind of theistic language. For such Jews traditional practice and symbolism can still retain powerful meaning. They may continue to engage in Jewish rituals such as the lighting of Shabbat candles and find meaning in many aspects of Jewish culture and religion. For example, to an atheist Jew, the Menorah might represent the power of the Jewish spirit or stand as a symbol of the fight against assimilation. No mention of a divine force in Jewish history would be accepted literally; the Torah may be viewed as a common mythology of the Jewish people, not a faith document or correct history.[citation needed]
Secular Jewish culture[edit]
See also: Jewish secularism
Many Jewish atheists would reject even this level of ritualized and symbolic identification, instead embracing a thoroughgoing secularism and basing their Jewishness entirely in ethnicity and secular Jewish culture. Possibilities for secular Jewishness include an identification with Jewish history and peoplehood, immersion in Jewish literature (including such non-religious Jewish authors as Philip Roth and Amos Oz), the consumption of Jewish food, the use of Jewish humor, and an attachment to Jewish languages such as Yiddish, Hebrew or Ladino. A high percentage of Israelis identify themselves as secular, rejecting the practice of the Jewish religion (see Religion in Israel). While some non-believers of Jewish ancestry do not consider themselves Jews, preferring to define themselves solely as atheists, some would argue that Judaism is arguably a culture and tradition that one can easily embrace without religious faith, despite Jewish culture revolving around God.[neutrality is disputed][9]
Notable people[edit]
See also: List of Jewish atheists
Historically, many well-known Jews have rejected a belief in deities. Some have denied the existence of a traditional deity while continuing to use religious language. In 1656 the seventeenth-century Jewish philosopher Baruch Spinoza was excommunicated by Amsterdam's Sephardic synagogue after advancing a pantheist notion of God that, according to some observers, is both compatible with and paved the way for modern atheism.[10] Deeply influenced by Spinoza, Albert Einstein used theistic language and identified strongly as a Jew, while rejecting the notion of a personal god.[11] The astrophysicist Carl Sagan was born into a Jewish family and was a non-theist.[12]
Karl Marx was born into an ethnically Jewish family but raised as a Lutheran, and is among the most notable and influential atheist thinkers of modern history; he developed dialectical and historical materialism which became the basis for his critique of capitalism and his theories of scientific socialism. Marx became a major influence among other prominent Jewish intellectuals including Moses Hess. In one of his most cited comments on religion he stated: "Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people".
Many other famous Jews have wholeheartedly embraced atheism, rejecting religiosity altogether. Sigmund Freud penned The Future of an Illusion, in which he both eschewed religious belief and outlined its origins and prospects. At the same time he urged a Jewish colleague to raise his son within the Jewish religion, arguing that "If you do not let your son grow up as a Jew, you will deprive him of those sources of energy which cannot be replaced by anything else."[13] The anarchist Emma Goldman was born to an Orthodox Jewish family and rejected belief in God, while the Israeli prime minister Golda Meir, when asked if she believed in God, answered "I believe in the Jewish people, and the Jewish people believe in God."[14] More recently, the French Jewish philosopher Jacques Derrida stated somewhat cryptically, "I rightly pass for an atheist".[15] In the world of entertainment, Woody Allen has made a career out of the tension between his Jewishness and religious doubt ("Not only is there no God, but try getting a plumber on weekends").[16]
See also[edit]
Conversion to Judaism
Christianity and Judaism
Ethical Culture
Haskalah
Humanistic Judaism
Jewish Bolshevism
Jews in apostasy
Schisms among the Jews
Who is a Jew?
Notes[edit]
1.Jump up ^ What Makes a Jew "Jewish"? – Jewish Identity
2.Jump up ^ Winston, Kimberly (September 26, 2011). "Judaism without God? Yes, say American atheists". USA Today. Retrieved July 14, 2013.
3.Jump up ^ See, for example: Daniel Septimus, Must a Jew Believe in God?
4.Jump up ^ "Reform Jews Reject a Temple Without God", New York Times, June 13, 1994.
5.Jump up ^ Berlinerblau, Jacques. "In Praise of Jewish Atheism". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on March 13, 2012.
6.Jump up ^ See, for example, Mordechai Kaplan, The Meaning of God in Modern Jewish Religion (New York: Behrman’s Jewish book house, 1937); Richard Rubenstein, After Auschwitz: Radical Theology and Contemporary Judaism (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1966).[page needed]
7.Jump up ^ Howard Wettstein, The Significance of Religious Experience (Oxford University Press, 2012)[page needed]
8.Jump up ^ See Harold M. Schulweis. Evil and the Morality of God (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 1984);[page needed] For Those Who Can't Believe : Overcoming the Obstacles to Faith (Harper Perennial, 1995).[page needed]
9.Jump up ^ An example of an atheist rejecting Jewish identification is cited in "Hipster Antisemitism," Zeek, January 2005
10.Jump up ^ Christopher Hitchens, ed., The Portable Atheist (Philadelphia: Da Capo Press, 2007), 21.
11.Jump up ^ "The Religious Non-believer: Einstein and his God", Moment, April 2007.
12.Jump up ^ Sagan, Carl (February 12, 1986). "Chapter 23". Broca's Brain: Reflections on the Romance of Science. Ballantine Books. p. 330. ISBN 0-345-33689-5.
13.Jump up ^ David S. Ariel, What Do Jews Believe? (New York: Shocken Books, 1995), 248.
14.Jump up ^ See Emma Goldman, "The Philosophy of Atheism," in Christopher Hitchens, ed., The Portable Atheist (Philadelphia: Da Capo Press, 2007), 129–33; Golda Meir is quoted by Jonathan Rosen in "So Was It Odd of God?", The New York Times, December 14, 2003.
15.Jump up ^ Scott Mclemee (October 11, 2004). "Jacques Derrida, Thinker Who Influenced and Infuriated a Range of Humanistic Fields, Dies at 74". Chronicle of Higher Education. Archived from the original on February 6, 2006.
16.Jump up ^ Woody Allen Quotes – The Quotations Page
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Jews and Judaism
Category
Portal
WikiProject
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Irreligion
Categories: Atheism
Jewish atheists
Secular Jewish culture
Disengagement from religion
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Català
Español
فارسی
Français
עברית
Ladino
Português
Edit links
This page was last modified on 2 June 2015, at 19:33.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_atheism
Christian existentialism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Part of a series on the
History of
Christian theology
Malmesbury Abbey's 1407 Bible from Belgium
Background
Theology · Early Christianity · Timeline · History of Christianity · Ecclesiastical polity · Trinitarianism · Nontrinitarianism · Restorationism · Christology · Mariology · Biblical canon · Deuterocanonical books
Ecumenical Creeds
Apostles' · Nicene
Chalcedonian · Athanasian
Patristics and Councils
Church Fathers · Augustine
Nicaea · Ephesus · Chalcedon
Post-Nicene development
Heresy · Monophysitism · Monothelitism · Iconoclasm · Gregory I · Alcuin · Photios · East–West Schism · Scholasticism · Aquinas · Anselm · Palamas
Reformation
Protestant Reformation · Luther · Melanchthon · Indulgences · Justification · Five solae · 95 Theses · Book of Concord · Predestination · Calvinism · Arminianism · English Reformation · Counter-Reformation · Trent
Since the Reformation
Pietism · Revivalism · John Wesley · Great Awakenings · Holiness movement · Restoration Movement · Existentialism · Liberalism · Modernism (Roman Catholicism) · Postmodernism · Vatican II · Radical Orthodoxy · Jean-Luc Marion · Hermeneutics · Liberation theology · Christian anarchism
P christianity.svg Christianity portal
v ·
t ·
e
Christian existentialism is a theo-philosophical movement which takes an existentialist approach to Christian theology. The school of thought is often traced back to the work of the Danish philosopher and theologian Søren Kierkegaard (1813–1855), who is considered the father of existentialism.[1]
Contents [hide]
1 Kierkegaardian themes
2 Major premises
3 The Bible
4 Notable Christian existentialists
5 See also
6 References
7 External links
Kierkegaardian themes[edit]
Søren Kierkegaard
Christian existentialism relies on Kierkegaard's understanding of Christianity. Kierkegaard argued that the universe is fundamentally paradoxical, and that its greatest paradox is the transcendent union of God and humans in the person of Jesus Christ. He also posited having a personal relationship with God that supersedes all prescribed moralities, social structures and communal norms,[2] since he asserted that following social conventions is essentially a personal aesthetic choice made by individuals.[citation needed]
Kierkegaard proposed that each person must make independent choices, which then constitute his existence. Each person suffers from the anguish of indecision (whether knowingly or unknowingly) until he commits to a particular choice about the way to live. Kierkegaard also proposed three rubrics with which to understand the conditions that issue from distinct life choices: the aesthetic, the ethical, and the religious.
Major premises[edit]
One of the major premises of Christian existentialism entails calling the masses back to a more genuine form of Christianity. This form is often identified with some notion of Early Christianity, which mostly existed during the first three centuries after Christ's crucifixion. Beginning with the Edict of Milan, which was issued by Roman Emperor Constantine I in AD 313, Christianity enjoyed a level of popularity among Romans and later among other Europeans. And yet Kierkegaard asserted that by the 19th century, the ultimate meaning of New Testament Christianity (love, cf. agape, mercy and loving-kindness) had become perverted, and Christianity had deviated considerably from its original threefold message of grace, humility, and love.
Another major premise of Christian existentialism involves Kierkegaard's conception of God and Love. For the most part, Kierkegaard equates God with Love.[3] Thus, when a person engages in the act of loving, he is in effect achieving an aspect of the divine. Kierkegaard also viewed the individual as a necessary synthesis of both finite and infinite elements. Therefore, when an individual does not come to a full realization of his infinite side, he is said to be in despair. For many contemporary Christian theologians, the notion of despair can be viewed as sin. However, to Kierkegaard, a man sinned when he was exposed to this idea of despair and chose a path other than one in accordance with God's will.
A final major premise of Christian existentialism entails the systematic undoing of evil acts. Kierkegaard asserted that once an action had been completed, it should be evaluated in the face of God, for holding oneself up to divine scrutiny was the only way to judge one's actions. Because actions constitute the manner in which something is deemed good or bad, one must be constantly conscious of the potential consequences of his actions. Kierkegaard believed that the choice for goodness ultimately came down to each individual. Yet Kierkegaard also foresaw the potential limiting of choices for individuals who fell into despair.[4]
The Bible[edit]
Christian Existentialism often refers to what it calls the indirect style of Christ's teachings, which it considers to be a distinctive and important aspect of his ministry. Christ's point, it says, is often left unsaid in any particular parable or saying, to permit each individual to confront the truth on his own.[5] This is particularly evident in (but is certainly not limited to) his parables. For example, in the Gospel of Matthew (18:21-35), Jesus tells a story about a man who is heavily in debt (the parable of the unforgiving servant). The debtor and his family are about to be sold into slavery, but he pleads for their lives. His master accordingly cancels the debt and sets them free. Later the man who was in debt abuses some people who owe him money, and he has them thrown in jail. Upon being informed of what this man has done, the master brings him in and says, "Why are you doing this? Weren't your debts canceled?" Then the debtor is thrown into jail until the debt is paid. Jesus ends his story by saying, "This is how it will be for you if you do not forgive your brother from your heart."
Often Christ's parables are a response to a question he is asked. After he tells the parable, he returns the question to the individual who originally asked it. Often we see a person asking a speculative question involving one's duty before God, and Christ's response is more or less the same question—but as God would ask that individual. For example, in the Gospel of Luke (10:25), a teacher of the law asks Jesus what it means to love one's neighbor as oneself. Jesus replies by telling the story of the Good Samaritan. In the story a man is beaten by thieves. A priest and a Levite pass him by, but a Samaritan takes pity on him and generously sets him up at an inn—paying his tab in advance. Then Jesus returns the question, "Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?". Jesus does not answer the question because he requires the individual to answer it, and thus to understand existence in the Bible, one must recognize who that passage is speaking to in particular. To Kierkegaard, it is the individual hearing the passage.
A good example of indirect communication in the Old Testament is the story of David and Nathan in 2 Samuel 12:1-14. David had committed adultery with a woman, Bathsheba, which resulted in her pregnancy. He then ordered her husband, Uriah, to come home from a war front so that he might sleep with his wife, thus making it appear as if Uriah had in fact conceived with Bathsheba. Instead, Uriah would not break faith with his fellow soldiers still on the battlefield and refused to sleep with her. David then ordered him back out to the battlefront where he would surely die, thus making Bathsheba a widow and available for marriage, which David soon arranged. David initially thought he had gotten away with murder, until Nathan arrived to tell him a story about two men, one rich and the other poor. The poor man was a shepherd with only one lamb, which he raised with his family. The lamb ate at his table and slept in his arms. One day a traveler came to visit the rich man; instead of taking one of his own sheep, the rich man seized the ewe lamb that belonged to the poor man and prepared it for his guest. When Nathan finished his story, David burned with anger and said (among other things): "As surely as the Lord lives, the man who did this deserves to die!". Nathan responded by saying "You are the man!". Realizing his guilt, David becomes filled with terror and remorse, tearfully repenting of his evil deed.
An existential reading of the Bible demands that the reader recognize that he is an existing subject, studying the words that God communicates to him personally. This is in contrast to looking at a collection of "truths" which are outside and unrelated to the reader.[6] Such a reader is not obligated to follow the commandments as if an external agent is forcing them upon him, but as though they are inside him and guiding him internally. This is the task Kierkegaard takes up when he asks: "Who has the more difficult task: the teacher who lectures on earnest things a meteor's distance from everyday life, or the learner who should put it to use?"[7] Existentially speaking, the Bible doesn't become an authority in a person's life until they permit the Bible to be their personal authority.
Notable Christian existentialists[edit]
Christian existentialists include German Protestant theologians Paul Tillich and Rudolph Bultmann, British Anglican theologian John Macquarrie, American theologian Lincoln Swain,[8] American philosopher Clifford Williams, French Catholic philosophers Gabriel Marcel, Emmanuel Mounier and Pierre Boutang, German philosopher Karl Jaspers, Spanish philosopher Miguel de Unamuno, and Russian philosophers Nikolai Berdyaev and Lev Shestov. Karl Barth added to Kierkegaard's ideas the notion that existential despair leads an individual to an awareness of God's infinite nature. Some ideas in the works of Russian author Fyodor Dostoevsky could arguably be placed within the tradition of Christian existentialism.
The roots of existentialism have been traced back as far as St Augustine.[9][10][11] Some of the most striking passages in Pascal's Pensées, including the famous section on the Wager, deal with existentialist themes.[12][13][14][15] Jacques Maritain, in Existence and the Existent: An Essay on Christian Existentialism,[16] finds the core of true existentialism in the thought of Thomas Aquinas.
See also[edit]
Atheist existentialism
Christian existential apologetics
Christian humanism
Christian philosophy
Fideism
Jewish existentialism
Meaning (existential)
Neo-orthodoxy
Postliberal theology
Postmodern Christianity
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ M.J. Eliade & C.J. Adams (1987). Encyclopedia of Religion (v.5). Macmillan Publishing Company.
2.Jump up ^ Søren Kierkegaard (1846). Concluding Unscientific Postscript, authored pseudonymously as Johannes Climacus.
3.Jump up ^ Søren Kierkegaard (1849). The Sickness Unto Death Trans. Alastair Hannay (New York: Penguin Books, 2004), 14.
4.Jump up ^ Søren Kierkegaard (1849). The Sickness Unto Death Trans. Alastair Hannay (New York: Penguin Books, 2004), 24.
5.Jump up ^ Donald D. Palmer (1996). Kierkegaard For Beginners. London, England: Writers And Readers Limited. p. 25.
6.Jump up ^ Howard V. Hong (1983). "Historical Introduction" to Fear and Trembling. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, p. x.
7.Jump up ^ Søren Kierkegaard (1847). Works of Love. Harper & Row, Publishers. New York, N.Y. 1962. p. 62.
8.Jump up ^ Lincoln Swain (2005). Five Articles, Soma: A Review of Religion and Culture.
9.Jump up ^ Gordon R. Lewis (Winter 1965). "Augustine and Existentialism". Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 8,1, pp. 13–22.
10.Jump up ^ Michial Farmer (6 July 2010). "A Primer on Religious Existentialism, Pt. 4: Augustine". christianhumanist.org
11.Jump up ^ Craig J. N. de Paulo, ed. (2006). The Influence of Augustine on Heidegger: The Emergence of An Augustinian Phenomenology. Lewiston: The Edwin Mellen Press.
12.Jump up ^ Desmond Clarke (2011). "Blaise Pascal", Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
13.Jump up ^ Clifford Williams (July 3, 2005). "Pascal". cliffordwilliams.net
14.Jump up ^ Michial Farmer (20 July 2010). "A Primer on Religious Existentialism, Pt. 5: Blaise Pascal". christianhumanist.org
15.Jump up ^ Michial Farmer (27 July 2010). "A Primer on Religious Existentialism, Pt. 6: Apologetics". christianhumanist.org
16.Jump up ^ Jacques Maritain (1947). Existence and the Existent: An Essay on Christian Existentialism (Court traité de l'existence et de l'existent), translated by Lewis Galantiere and Gerald B. Phelan. New York: Pantheon Books, 1948.
External links[edit]
A website that explores the existential teachings of Jesus, with references to Kierkegaard and Tillich
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Philosophy of religion
Portal
Category
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Philosophy
Categories: Christian existentialists
Christian philosophy
Christian radicalism
Christian theological movements
Political theories
Religious existentialism
Søren Kierkegaard
Types of existentialism
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Dansk
فارسی
Français
Norsk bokmål
Português
Suomi
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 29 January 2015, at 21:35.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_existentialism
Christian existentialism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Part of a series on the
History of
Christian theology
Malmesbury Abbey's 1407 Bible from Belgium
Background
Theology · Early Christianity · Timeline · History of Christianity · Ecclesiastical polity · Trinitarianism · Nontrinitarianism · Restorationism · Christology · Mariology · Biblical canon · Deuterocanonical books
Ecumenical Creeds
Apostles' · Nicene
Chalcedonian · Athanasian
Patristics and Councils
Church Fathers · Augustine
Nicaea · Ephesus · Chalcedon
Post-Nicene development
Heresy · Monophysitism · Monothelitism · Iconoclasm · Gregory I · Alcuin · Photios · East–West Schism · Scholasticism · Aquinas · Anselm · Palamas
Reformation
Protestant Reformation · Luther · Melanchthon · Indulgences · Justification · Five solae · 95 Theses · Book of Concord · Predestination · Calvinism · Arminianism · English Reformation · Counter-Reformation · Trent
Since the Reformation
Pietism · Revivalism · John Wesley · Great Awakenings · Holiness movement · Restoration Movement · Existentialism · Liberalism · Modernism (Roman Catholicism) · Postmodernism · Vatican II · Radical Orthodoxy · Jean-Luc Marion · Hermeneutics · Liberation theology · Christian anarchism
P christianity.svg Christianity portal
v ·
t ·
e
Christian existentialism is a theo-philosophical movement which takes an existentialist approach to Christian theology. The school of thought is often traced back to the work of the Danish philosopher and theologian Søren Kierkegaard (1813–1855), who is considered the father of existentialism.[1]
Contents [hide]
1 Kierkegaardian themes
2 Major premises
3 The Bible
4 Notable Christian existentialists
5 See also
6 References
7 External links
Kierkegaardian themes[edit]
Søren Kierkegaard
Christian existentialism relies on Kierkegaard's understanding of Christianity. Kierkegaard argued that the universe is fundamentally paradoxical, and that its greatest paradox is the transcendent union of God and humans in the person of Jesus Christ. He also posited having a personal relationship with God that supersedes all prescribed moralities, social structures and communal norms,[2] since he asserted that following social conventions is essentially a personal aesthetic choice made by individuals.[citation needed]
Kierkegaard proposed that each person must make independent choices, which then constitute his existence. Each person suffers from the anguish of indecision (whether knowingly or unknowingly) until he commits to a particular choice about the way to live. Kierkegaard also proposed three rubrics with which to understand the conditions that issue from distinct life choices: the aesthetic, the ethical, and the religious.
Major premises[edit]
One of the major premises of Christian existentialism entails calling the masses back to a more genuine form of Christianity. This form is often identified with some notion of Early Christianity, which mostly existed during the first three centuries after Christ's crucifixion. Beginning with the Edict of Milan, which was issued by Roman Emperor Constantine I in AD 313, Christianity enjoyed a level of popularity among Romans and later among other Europeans. And yet Kierkegaard asserted that by the 19th century, the ultimate meaning of New Testament Christianity (love, cf. agape, mercy and loving-kindness) had become perverted, and Christianity had deviated considerably from its original threefold message of grace, humility, and love.
Another major premise of Christian existentialism involves Kierkegaard's conception of God and Love. For the most part, Kierkegaard equates God with Love.[3] Thus, when a person engages in the act of loving, he is in effect achieving an aspect of the divine. Kierkegaard also viewed the individual as a necessary synthesis of both finite and infinite elements. Therefore, when an individual does not come to a full realization of his infinite side, he is said to be in despair. For many contemporary Christian theologians, the notion of despair can be viewed as sin. However, to Kierkegaard, a man sinned when he was exposed to this idea of despair and chose a path other than one in accordance with God's will.
A final major premise of Christian existentialism entails the systematic undoing of evil acts. Kierkegaard asserted that once an action had been completed, it should be evaluated in the face of God, for holding oneself up to divine scrutiny was the only way to judge one's actions. Because actions constitute the manner in which something is deemed good or bad, one must be constantly conscious of the potential consequences of his actions. Kierkegaard believed that the choice for goodness ultimately came down to each individual. Yet Kierkegaard also foresaw the potential limiting of choices for individuals who fell into despair.[4]
The Bible[edit]
Christian Existentialism often refers to what it calls the indirect style of Christ's teachings, which it considers to be a distinctive and important aspect of his ministry. Christ's point, it says, is often left unsaid in any particular parable or saying, to permit each individual to confront the truth on his own.[5] This is particularly evident in (but is certainly not limited to) his parables. For example, in the Gospel of Matthew (18:21-35), Jesus tells a story about a man who is heavily in debt (the parable of the unforgiving servant). The debtor and his family are about to be sold into slavery, but he pleads for their lives. His master accordingly cancels the debt and sets them free. Later the man who was in debt abuses some people who owe him money, and he has them thrown in jail. Upon being informed of what this man has done, the master brings him in and says, "Why are you doing this? Weren't your debts canceled?" Then the debtor is thrown into jail until the debt is paid. Jesus ends his story by saying, "This is how it will be for you if you do not forgive your brother from your heart."
Often Christ's parables are a response to a question he is asked. After he tells the parable, he returns the question to the individual who originally asked it. Often we see a person asking a speculative question involving one's duty before God, and Christ's response is more or less the same question—but as God would ask that individual. For example, in the Gospel of Luke (10:25), a teacher of the law asks Jesus what it means to love one's neighbor as oneself. Jesus replies by telling the story of the Good Samaritan. In the story a man is beaten by thieves. A priest and a Levite pass him by, but a Samaritan takes pity on him and generously sets him up at an inn—paying his tab in advance. Then Jesus returns the question, "Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?". Jesus does not answer the question because he requires the individual to answer it, and thus to understand existence in the Bible, one must recognize who that passage is speaking to in particular. To Kierkegaard, it is the individual hearing the passage.
A good example of indirect communication in the Old Testament is the story of David and Nathan in 2 Samuel 12:1-14. David had committed adultery with a woman, Bathsheba, which resulted in her pregnancy. He then ordered her husband, Uriah, to come home from a war front so that he might sleep with his wife, thus making it appear as if Uriah had in fact conceived with Bathsheba. Instead, Uriah would not break faith with his fellow soldiers still on the battlefield and refused to sleep with her. David then ordered him back out to the battlefront where he would surely die, thus making Bathsheba a widow and available for marriage, which David soon arranged. David initially thought he had gotten away with murder, until Nathan arrived to tell him a story about two men, one rich and the other poor. The poor man was a shepherd with only one lamb, which he raised with his family. The lamb ate at his table and slept in his arms. One day a traveler came to visit the rich man; instead of taking one of his own sheep, the rich man seized the ewe lamb that belonged to the poor man and prepared it for his guest. When Nathan finished his story, David burned with anger and said (among other things): "As surely as the Lord lives, the man who did this deserves to die!". Nathan responded by saying "You are the man!". Realizing his guilt, David becomes filled with terror and remorse, tearfully repenting of his evil deed.
An existential reading of the Bible demands that the reader recognize that he is an existing subject, studying the words that God communicates to him personally. This is in contrast to looking at a collection of "truths" which are outside and unrelated to the reader.[6] Such a reader is not obligated to follow the commandments as if an external agent is forcing them upon him, but as though they are inside him and guiding him internally. This is the task Kierkegaard takes up when he asks: "Who has the more difficult task: the teacher who lectures on earnest things a meteor's distance from everyday life, or the learner who should put it to use?"[7] Existentially speaking, the Bible doesn't become an authority in a person's life until they permit the Bible to be their personal authority.
Notable Christian existentialists[edit]
Christian existentialists include German Protestant theologians Paul Tillich and Rudolph Bultmann, British Anglican theologian John Macquarrie, American theologian Lincoln Swain,[8] American philosopher Clifford Williams, French Catholic philosophers Gabriel Marcel, Emmanuel Mounier and Pierre Boutang, German philosopher Karl Jaspers, Spanish philosopher Miguel de Unamuno, and Russian philosophers Nikolai Berdyaev and Lev Shestov. Karl Barth added to Kierkegaard's ideas the notion that existential despair leads an individual to an awareness of God's infinite nature. Some ideas in the works of Russian author Fyodor Dostoevsky could arguably be placed within the tradition of Christian existentialism.
The roots of existentialism have been traced back as far as St Augustine.[9][10][11] Some of the most striking passages in Pascal's Pensées, including the famous section on the Wager, deal with existentialist themes.[12][13][14][15] Jacques Maritain, in Existence and the Existent: An Essay on Christian Existentialism,[16] finds the core of true existentialism in the thought of Thomas Aquinas.
See also[edit]
Atheist existentialism
Christian existential apologetics
Christian humanism
Christian philosophy
Fideism
Jewish existentialism
Meaning (existential)
Neo-orthodoxy
Postliberal theology
Postmodern Christianity
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ M.J. Eliade & C.J. Adams (1987). Encyclopedia of Religion (v.5). Macmillan Publishing Company.
2.Jump up ^ Søren Kierkegaard (1846). Concluding Unscientific Postscript, authored pseudonymously as Johannes Climacus.
3.Jump up ^ Søren Kierkegaard (1849). The Sickness Unto Death Trans. Alastair Hannay (New York: Penguin Books, 2004), 14.
4.Jump up ^ Søren Kierkegaard (1849). The Sickness Unto Death Trans. Alastair Hannay (New York: Penguin Books, 2004), 24.
5.Jump up ^ Donald D. Palmer (1996). Kierkegaard For Beginners. London, England: Writers And Readers Limited. p. 25.
6.Jump up ^ Howard V. Hong (1983). "Historical Introduction" to Fear and Trembling. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, p. x.
7.Jump up ^ Søren Kierkegaard (1847). Works of Love. Harper & Row, Publishers. New York, N.Y. 1962. p. 62.
8.Jump up ^ Lincoln Swain (2005). Five Articles, Soma: A Review of Religion and Culture.
9.Jump up ^ Gordon R. Lewis (Winter 1965). "Augustine and Existentialism". Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 8,1, pp. 13–22.
10.Jump up ^ Michial Farmer (6 July 2010). "A Primer on Religious Existentialism, Pt. 4: Augustine". christianhumanist.org
11.Jump up ^ Craig J. N. de Paulo, ed. (2006). The Influence of Augustine on Heidegger: The Emergence of An Augustinian Phenomenology. Lewiston: The Edwin Mellen Press.
12.Jump up ^ Desmond Clarke (2011). "Blaise Pascal", Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
13.Jump up ^ Clifford Williams (July 3, 2005). "Pascal". cliffordwilliams.net
14.Jump up ^ Michial Farmer (20 July 2010). "A Primer on Religious Existentialism, Pt. 5: Blaise Pascal". christianhumanist.org
15.Jump up ^ Michial Farmer (27 July 2010). "A Primer on Religious Existentialism, Pt. 6: Apologetics". christianhumanist.org
16.Jump up ^ Jacques Maritain (1947). Existence and the Existent: An Essay on Christian Existentialism (Court traité de l'existence et de l'existent), translated by Lewis Galantiere and Gerald B. Phelan. New York: Pantheon Books, 1948.
External links[edit]
A website that explores the existential teachings of Jesus, with references to Kierkegaard and Tillich
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Philosophy of religion
Portal
Category
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Philosophy
Categories: Christian existentialists
Christian philosophy
Christian radicalism
Christian theological movements
Political theories
Religious existentialism
Søren Kierkegaard
Types of existentialism
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Dansk
فارسی
Français
Norsk bokmål
Português
Suomi
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 29 January 2015, at 21:35.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_existentialism
Jesuism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about the philosophy encompassing the teachings of Jesus. For the Catholic religious order known as the Jesuits, see Society of Jesus.
Part of a series on
Jesus
Jesus in Christianity[show]
Jesus in Islam[show]
Background[show]
Jesus in history[show]
Perspectives on Jesus[show]
Jesus in culture[show]
Portal icon Christianity portal
Portal icon Islam portal
v ·
t ·
e
Jesuism, also called Jesusism or Jesuanism, is the philosophy or teachings of Jesus of Nazareth and the adherence to them.[1]
Jesuism considers Jesus as the supreme authority of Christianity. Within Jesuism, one seeks to restore Jesus' sayings to their original purity. This includes eradicating human interpolations of the Gospels and misconceptions revealed by recent archaeological research.[citation needed]
Jesuism is distinct from and sometimes opposed to mainstream directions.[2] In particular, the term is often contrasted with the theology attributed to Paul of Tarsus and mainstream church dogma.[3][4] Whilst not being opposed to the Christian Bible or Church doctrine, Jesuism does not affirm their authority over the teachings of Jesus. As a philosophy, Owen Flanagan characterized Jesuism as naturalistic and rationalist, rejecting the conflict between faith and science.[5]
Though not specifically associated with Jesuism, the red letter Bibles are one method of studying the teachings of Jesus. Another is the Jefferson Bible. Many New Testament scholars have tried to identify Jesus' authentic sayings and actions. Géza Vermes, in particular, in his The Authentic Gospel of Jesus identifies what elements of the synoptic gospels are attributable to Jesus.[6]
Contents [hide]
1 Etymology
2 History of usage
3 Beliefs, practices and adherents
4 Jesuism versus Paulinism
5 See also
6 References
Etymology[edit]
The term "Jesuism" was coined by the late 1800s. It is derived from "Jesus" (Jesus of Nazareth) + "-ism" (English suffix, a characteristic or system of beliefs, from French -isme, Latin -ismus, Greek -ismos).[7][8]
History of usage[edit]
Carl Heinrich Bloch's rendition of Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, which is central to the philosophy of Jesusism.
As a concept distinct from Christianity, the terms Jesuism, Jesusism and Jesuanism have been referenced by philosophers, theologians, and writers for over a century. In 1878, freethinker and former Shaker D. M. Bennett wrote that "Jesuism", as distinct from "Paulism", was the gospel taught by Peter, John and James, and the Messianic doctrine of a new Jewish sect.[9] In 1894, American pathologist and atheist Frank Seaver Billings defined "Jesusism" as the "Christianity of the Gospels" and a philosophy which "can be attributed directly to the teachings of Jesus the Nazarene".[10][11] In 1909, the Seventh-day Adventist newspaper Signs of the Times, in an issue titled "Modern Christianity Not Jesusism", the question is posed: "Christianity of today is not the old original Christianity. It is not Jesusism, for it is not the religion which Jesus preached. Is it not time to make Christianity the religion which He personally preached and which He personally practiced?"[12] Harvard theologian Bouck White, in 1911, also defined "Jesusism" as "the religion which Jesus preached".[1] Lord Ernest Hamilton in 1912 wrote that "Jesuism" was simply to love one another and love God.[13] The philosophy of Jesusism was described in the book The Naked Truth of Jesusism from Oriental Manuscripts, penned by theologian Lyman Fairbanks George in 1914, as follows:
It is to restore Jesus' sayings to their original purity.
It is to eradicate from the Gospels the interpolations of the Middle Ages.
It is to relate the misconceptions revealed by recent archaeological research.
It is to present Jesus from an economic viewpoint.
It is to break through the spell spectral of Cosmic Credulity.
It is to toll the knell of schism through Jesusism.[14]
The Orthodox theologian Sergei Bulgakov further noted in 1935 that "the concentration of piety on the Christ alone has become a deviation already known by a special term as Jesusism".[15] Influential Catholic theologian Karl Rahner referred to "Jesusism" as a focus on the life of Jesus and attempts to imitate his life, as opposed to a focus on God or the Christian Church.[16] University of Melbourne professor Lindsay Falvey noted in 2009 that "the gospel story so differs from Church doctrine that it could well be of a different religion – Jesusism".[17] Jesusism became the subject of increased academic discussion following its reference by Duke University neurobiologist and philosopher Owen Flanagan in his 2007 book The Really Hard Problem: Meaning in a Material World.[18] Flanagan defines Jesusism as the "message" of Jesus and notes that he "call[s] it ‘Jesusism’ because most Christian Churches do not endorse Jesus’ message truthfully".[2] Rodney Stenning Edgecombe, a professor at the University of Cape Town, in a 2009 essay titled Communication Across the Social Divide remarks how Christianity shifted away from Jesuism; the moral tenets Jesus preached.[19] The terms Jesuism, Jesusism and Jesuanism are also referenced popularly on religious blogs and internet groups.
Beliefs, practices and adherents[edit]
There is no definitive meaning of Jesuism, Jesusism or Jesuanism, and hence no clear ideology. However, Frank Seaver Billings described "Jesusism" as a combination of anarchism and communism (see anarchist communism and Christian anarchism).[8][20][21] Billings, an American atheist and materialist, was critical of all religion, including Jesuism.[10][22]
Various groups use the terms Jesuism, Jesusism and Jesuanism. These include disenchanted Christians who are critical of institutional religion or Pauline Christianity, people who identify themselves as disciples of Jesus rather than Christians, Christian atheists who accept Jesus' teachings but do not believe in God, and atheists who are critical of all religion including Jesuism. Adherents may be termed Jesuists, Jesusists or Jesuans.[23] Due to its fundamental disposition towards theological revelation, some publishers have drawn comparisons between Jesuists and Muwahhidist Muslims.[24]
Jesuism versus Paulinism[edit]
Jesuism does not affirm the spiritual or scriptural authority of the Christian Bible (with the exception of the Gospels). Jesuism is particularly contrasted with Pauline Christianity or Paulinism, the theology of Paul of Tarsus.[25][26]
Ludwig Wittgenstein described the following differences between Paulinism and Jesuism:
The spring which flows quietly and transparently through the Gospels seems to have foam on it in Paul’s Epistles. Or, that is how it seems to me. Perhaps it is just my own impurity which sees cloudiness in it; for why shouldn’t this impurity be able to pollute what is clear? But to me it’s as if I saw human passion here, something like pride or anger, which does not agree with the humility of the Gospels. As if there were here an emphasis on his own person, and even as a religious act, which is foreign to the Gospel.
In the Gospels – so it seems to me – everything is less pretentious, humbler, simpler. There are huts; with Paul a church. There all men are equal and God himself is a man; with Paul there is already something like a hierarchy; honours and offices.[27]
See also[edit]
Christian deism
Christian atheism
Jesus movement
Jewish Christian
Ministry of Jesus
New Monasticism
Sermon on the Mount
Synoptic Gospels
The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ
Tolstoyan movement
References[edit]
1.^ Jump up to: a b Bouck White. The Call of the Carpenter. USA: Doubleday, Page & Company, 1911. p.314.
2.^ Jump up to: a b Owen J. Flanagan. The Really Hard Problem: Meaning in a Material World. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2007. p.36
3.Jump up ^ Edgar Dewitt Jones. Paul the Stranger. Abilene: Voice of Jesus, 2003 (online transcription).
4.Jump up ^ Douglas J. Del Tondo. Jesus' Words Only. San Diego: Infinity Publishing, 2006. p.19
5.Jump up ^ Owen J. Flanagan. The Really Hard Problem: Meaning in a Material World. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2007. p.263
6.Jump up ^ The Authentic Gospel of Jesus. Geza Vermes. Penguin Books. 2003
7.Jump up ^ D. M. Bennett (1878). "Champions of the Church: Their crimes and persecutions". pp. 119–124. "Paulinism versus Jesuism"
8.^ Jump up to: a b Frank S. Billings (1894). "How shall the rich escape?". Arena Publishing. pp. 42 and 43. "Jesusism, which is Communism, and not Christianity at all as the world accepts it...Jesusism is unadulterated communism, with a most destructive anarchistic tendency"
9.Jump up ^ D. M. Bennett. The Champions of the Church: Their crimes and persecutions. p. 84. "The Progress of Jesuism"
10.^ Jump up to: a b Frank S. Billings (1894). "How shall the rich escape?". Arena Publishing. p. 231. "Emphatically I affirm, not my belief, but my certain knowledge. There is no God"
11.Jump up ^ Frank S. Billings (1894). "How shall the rich escape?". Arena Publishing. p. 42. "Jesusism, or the Christianity of the Gospels, which we think can be attributed directly to the teachings of Jesus the Nazarene...There is but one standard to follow; that is, the utterances directly attributed to Jesus, particularly the celebrated Sermon on the Mount."
12.Jump up ^ "Modern Christianity Not Jesusism." Signs of the Times Vol. 24 No. 25. Melbourne: Signs Publishing Company Limited, June 21, 1909.
13.Jump up ^ Lord Ernest Hamilton (1912). Involution. pp. 169 and 180. "Jeusism"
14.Jump up ^ Lyman F. George. The Naked Truth of Jesusism from Oriental Manuscripts. George Company, Pittsburg, 1914. p. 31
15.Jump up ^ Sergius Bulgakov. The Orthodox Church. London: Centenary Press, 1935. p.102
16.Jump up ^ Declan Marmion, Mary E. Hines. The Cambridge companion to Karl Rahner. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. p.166
17.Jump up ^ John L. Falvey. Buddhist-Christian dialogue: Four Papers from the Parliament of the World's Religions. Melbourne, 2009. pp.10-12
18.Jump up ^ Mark R. Alfino. "Spring 2010 Senior Seminar Note 7.3.1. Jesusism?" Spokane: Gonzaga University, 2010.
19.Jump up ^ Rodney Stenning Edgecombe (2009). "Communication Across the Social Divide". p. 33. "Christianity derives from the Greek adjective "christos" ("anointed")…This shifted focus from what he preached (moral tenets that ought properly to be called "Jesuism") to what subsequent commentators, Paul of Tarsus among them, made of his violent death"
20.Jump up ^ Frank S. Billings (1894). "How shall the rich escape?". Arena Publishing. p. 209. "Taking the gospels as our only possible authority, it cannot be denied that Jesusism and anarchism are almost identical"
21.Jump up ^ Frank S. Billings (1894). "How shall the rich escape?". Arena Publishing. p. 54. "If there ever was an anarchist on Earth the gospel Jesus was one"
22.Jump up ^ Frank S. Billings (1894). "How shall the rich escape?". Arena Publishing. p. 84. "Materialist though I am"
23.Jump up ^ The YWCA magazine, Volumes 66-67. 1972. p. 46.
24.Jump up ^ The Church and the Gospel - Page 30, Jean Guitton - 1961
25.Jump up ^ "Paulinism." Random House Dictionary. Random House, 2011.
26.Jump up ^ Frank S. Billings (1894). "How shall the rich escape?". Arena Publishing. p. 114. "Theology has really never recognized individualism…founding itself on that soured brute, Paul of Tarsus, and really denying, like Peter, the nobler spirit of the gospels"
27.Jump up ^ Wittgenstein, as cited in Norman Malcolm. Wittgenstein: A Religious Point of View? London, Routledge, 1993. p.16
[hide]
v ·
t ·
e
Jesus
Historicity
Chronology of Jesus ·
Genealogy of Jesus ·
Historical Jesus (Quest for the historical Jesus ·
Portraits of the historical Jesus ·
Sources ·
Josephus on Jesus ·
Tacitus mention ·
Mara bar Serapion letter)
·
Historicity (Gospels)
Life
Birth (Nativity ·
Mary ·
Joseph)
·
Childhood ·
Unknown years ·
Baptism ·
Temptation ·
Apostles (selection ·
Great Commission)
·
Ministry ·
Sermon on the Mount (Plain)
·
Parables ·
Miracles ·
Transfiguration ·
Homelessness ·
Passion (arrest)
·
Crucifixion ·
Tomb ·
Resurrection ·
Ascension
New Testament
Gospels (Matthew ·
Mark ·
Luke ·
John ·
Gospel harmony ·
Oral gospel traditions)
·
Life of Jesus in the New Testament ·
Historical background of the New Testament ·
New Testament places associated with Jesus ·
Names and titles of Jesus in the New Testament
Culture
Language of Jesus ·
Bibliography ·
Race and appearance of Jesus
Christianity
Christ ·
Christianity ·
Christology ·
Depictions of Jesus (art)
·
Jesus in Christianity ·
Relics associated with Jesus ·
Scholastic Lutheran Christology ·
Second Coming of Christ ·
Session of Christ
Other views
Brothers of Jesus ·
Jesuism ·
Jesus in Ahmadiyya Islam ·
Jesus in comparative mythology (Christ myth theory)
·
Jesus in Islam ·
Jesus in Scientology ·
Judaism's view of Jesus (in the Talmud)
·
Master Jesus ·
Religious perspectives on Jesus ·
Criticism
Commons page Commons ·
Wikiquote page Wikiquote
Categories: Christian philosophy
Doctrines and teachings of Jesus
Christian terminology
Christian radicalism
Simple living
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Dansk
Português
Shqip
Edit links
This page was last modified on 1 April 2015, at 20:14.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesuism
Jesuism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about the philosophy encompassing the teachings of Jesus. For the Catholic religious order known as the Jesuits, see Society of Jesus.
Part of a series on
Jesus
Jesus in Christianity[show]
Jesus in Islam[show]
Background[show]
Jesus in history[show]
Perspectives on Jesus[show]
Jesus in culture[show]
Portal icon Christianity portal
Portal icon Islam portal
v ·
t ·
e
Jesuism, also called Jesusism or Jesuanism, is the philosophy or teachings of Jesus of Nazareth and the adherence to them.[1]
Jesuism considers Jesus as the supreme authority of Christianity. Within Jesuism, one seeks to restore Jesus' sayings to their original purity. This includes eradicating human interpolations of the Gospels and misconceptions revealed by recent archaeological research.[citation needed]
Jesuism is distinct from and sometimes opposed to mainstream directions.[2] In particular, the term is often contrasted with the theology attributed to Paul of Tarsus and mainstream church dogma.[3][4] Whilst not being opposed to the Christian Bible or Church doctrine, Jesuism does not affirm their authority over the teachings of Jesus. As a philosophy, Owen Flanagan characterized Jesuism as naturalistic and rationalist, rejecting the conflict between faith and science.[5]
Though not specifically associated with Jesuism, the red letter Bibles are one method of studying the teachings of Jesus. Another is the Jefferson Bible. Many New Testament scholars have tried to identify Jesus' authentic sayings and actions. Géza Vermes, in particular, in his The Authentic Gospel of Jesus identifies what elements of the synoptic gospels are attributable to Jesus.[6]
Contents [hide]
1 Etymology
2 History of usage
3 Beliefs, practices and adherents
4 Jesuism versus Paulinism
5 See also
6 References
Etymology[edit]
The term "Jesuism" was coined by the late 1800s. It is derived from "Jesus" (Jesus of Nazareth) + "-ism" (English suffix, a characteristic or system of beliefs, from French -isme, Latin -ismus, Greek -ismos).[7][8]
History of usage[edit]
Carl Heinrich Bloch's rendition of Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, which is central to the philosophy of Jesusism.
As a concept distinct from Christianity, the terms Jesuism, Jesusism and Jesuanism have been referenced by philosophers, theologians, and writers for over a century. In 1878, freethinker and former Shaker D. M. Bennett wrote that "Jesuism", as distinct from "Paulism", was the gospel taught by Peter, John and James, and the Messianic doctrine of a new Jewish sect.[9] In 1894, American pathologist and atheist Frank Seaver Billings defined "Jesusism" as the "Christianity of the Gospels" and a philosophy which "can be attributed directly to the teachings of Jesus the Nazarene".[10][11] In 1909, the Seventh-day Adventist newspaper Signs of the Times, in an issue titled "Modern Christianity Not Jesusism", the question is posed: "Christianity of today is not the old original Christianity. It is not Jesusism, for it is not the religion which Jesus preached. Is it not time to make Christianity the religion which He personally preached and which He personally practiced?"[12] Harvard theologian Bouck White, in 1911, also defined "Jesusism" as "the religion which Jesus preached".[1] Lord Ernest Hamilton in 1912 wrote that "Jesuism" was simply to love one another and love God.[13] The philosophy of Jesusism was described in the book The Naked Truth of Jesusism from Oriental Manuscripts, penned by theologian Lyman Fairbanks George in 1914, as follows:
It is to restore Jesus' sayings to their original purity.
It is to eradicate from the Gospels the interpolations of the Middle Ages.
It is to relate the misconceptions revealed by recent archaeological research.
It is to present Jesus from an economic viewpoint.
It is to break through the spell spectral of Cosmic Credulity.
It is to toll the knell of schism through Jesusism.[14]
The Orthodox theologian Sergei Bulgakov further noted in 1935 that "the concentration of piety on the Christ alone has become a deviation already known by a special term as Jesusism".[15] Influential Catholic theologian Karl Rahner referred to "Jesusism" as a focus on the life of Jesus and attempts to imitate his life, as opposed to a focus on God or the Christian Church.[16] University of Melbourne professor Lindsay Falvey noted in 2009 that "the gospel story so differs from Church doctrine that it could well be of a different religion – Jesusism".[17] Jesusism became the subject of increased academic discussion following its reference by Duke University neurobiologist and philosopher Owen Flanagan in his 2007 book The Really Hard Problem: Meaning in a Material World.[18] Flanagan defines Jesusism as the "message" of Jesus and notes that he "call[s] it ‘Jesusism’ because most Christian Churches do not endorse Jesus’ message truthfully".[2] Rodney Stenning Edgecombe, a professor at the University of Cape Town, in a 2009 essay titled Communication Across the Social Divide remarks how Christianity shifted away from Jesuism; the moral tenets Jesus preached.[19] The terms Jesuism, Jesusism and Jesuanism are also referenced popularly on religious blogs and internet groups.
Beliefs, practices and adherents[edit]
There is no definitive meaning of Jesuism, Jesusism or Jesuanism, and hence no clear ideology. However, Frank Seaver Billings described "Jesusism" as a combination of anarchism and communism (see anarchist communism and Christian anarchism).[8][20][21] Billings, an American atheist and materialist, was critical of all religion, including Jesuism.[10][22]
Various groups use the terms Jesuism, Jesusism and Jesuanism. These include disenchanted Christians who are critical of institutional religion or Pauline Christianity, people who identify themselves as disciples of Jesus rather than Christians, Christian atheists who accept Jesus' teachings but do not believe in God, and atheists who are critical of all religion including Jesuism. Adherents may be termed Jesuists, Jesusists or Jesuans.[23] Due to its fundamental disposition towards theological revelation, some publishers have drawn comparisons between Jesuists and Muwahhidist Muslims.[24]
Jesuism versus Paulinism[edit]
Jesuism does not affirm the spiritual or scriptural authority of the Christian Bible (with the exception of the Gospels). Jesuism is particularly contrasted with Pauline Christianity or Paulinism, the theology of Paul of Tarsus.[25][26]
Ludwig Wittgenstein described the following differences between Paulinism and Jesuism:
The spring which flows quietly and transparently through the Gospels seems to have foam on it in Paul’s Epistles. Or, that is how it seems to me. Perhaps it is just my own impurity which sees cloudiness in it; for why shouldn’t this impurity be able to pollute what is clear? But to me it’s as if I saw human passion here, something like pride or anger, which does not agree with the humility of the Gospels. As if there were here an emphasis on his own person, and even as a religious act, which is foreign to the Gospel.
In the Gospels – so it seems to me – everything is less pretentious, humbler, simpler. There are huts; with Paul a church. There all men are equal and God himself is a man; with Paul there is already something like a hierarchy; honours and offices.[27]
See also[edit]
Christian deism
Christian atheism
Jesus movement
Jewish Christian
Ministry of Jesus
New Monasticism
Sermon on the Mount
Synoptic Gospels
The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ
Tolstoyan movement
References[edit]
1.^ Jump up to: a b Bouck White. The Call of the Carpenter. USA: Doubleday, Page & Company, 1911. p.314.
2.^ Jump up to: a b Owen J. Flanagan. The Really Hard Problem: Meaning in a Material World. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2007. p.36
3.Jump up ^ Edgar Dewitt Jones. Paul the Stranger. Abilene: Voice of Jesus, 2003 (online transcription).
4.Jump up ^ Douglas J. Del Tondo. Jesus' Words Only. San Diego: Infinity Publishing, 2006. p.19
5.Jump up ^ Owen J. Flanagan. The Really Hard Problem: Meaning in a Material World. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2007. p.263
6.Jump up ^ The Authentic Gospel of Jesus. Geza Vermes. Penguin Books. 2003
7.Jump up ^ D. M. Bennett (1878). "Champions of the Church: Their crimes and persecutions". pp. 119–124. "Paulinism versus Jesuism"
8.^ Jump up to: a b Frank S. Billings (1894). "How shall the rich escape?". Arena Publishing. pp. 42 and 43. "Jesusism, which is Communism, and not Christianity at all as the world accepts it...Jesusism is unadulterated communism, with a most destructive anarchistic tendency"
9.Jump up ^ D. M. Bennett. The Champions of the Church: Their crimes and persecutions. p. 84. "The Progress of Jesuism"
10.^ Jump up to: a b Frank S. Billings (1894). "How shall the rich escape?". Arena Publishing. p. 231. "Emphatically I affirm, not my belief, but my certain knowledge. There is no God"
11.Jump up ^ Frank S. Billings (1894). "How shall the rich escape?". Arena Publishing. p. 42. "Jesusism, or the Christianity of the Gospels, which we think can be attributed directly to the teachings of Jesus the Nazarene...There is but one standard to follow; that is, the utterances directly attributed to Jesus, particularly the celebrated Sermon on the Mount."
12.Jump up ^ "Modern Christianity Not Jesusism." Signs of the Times Vol. 24 No. 25. Melbourne: Signs Publishing Company Limited, June 21, 1909.
13.Jump up ^ Lord Ernest Hamilton (1912). Involution. pp. 169 and 180. "Jeusism"
14.Jump up ^ Lyman F. George. The Naked Truth of Jesusism from Oriental Manuscripts. George Company, Pittsburg, 1914. p. 31
15.Jump up ^ Sergius Bulgakov. The Orthodox Church. London: Centenary Press, 1935. p.102
16.Jump up ^ Declan Marmion, Mary E. Hines. The Cambridge companion to Karl Rahner. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. p.166
17.Jump up ^ John L. Falvey. Buddhist-Christian dialogue: Four Papers from the Parliament of the World's Religions. Melbourne, 2009. pp.10-12
18.Jump up ^ Mark R. Alfino. "Spring 2010 Senior Seminar Note 7.3.1. Jesusism?" Spokane: Gonzaga University, 2010.
19.Jump up ^ Rodney Stenning Edgecombe (2009). "Communication Across the Social Divide". p. 33. "Christianity derives from the Greek adjective "christos" ("anointed")…This shifted focus from what he preached (moral tenets that ought properly to be called "Jesuism") to what subsequent commentators, Paul of Tarsus among them, made of his violent death"
20.Jump up ^ Frank S. Billings (1894). "How shall the rich escape?". Arena Publishing. p. 209. "Taking the gospels as our only possible authority, it cannot be denied that Jesusism and anarchism are almost identical"
21.Jump up ^ Frank S. Billings (1894). "How shall the rich escape?". Arena Publishing. p. 54. "If there ever was an anarchist on Earth the gospel Jesus was one"
22.Jump up ^ Frank S. Billings (1894). "How shall the rich escape?". Arena Publishing. p. 84. "Materialist though I am"
23.Jump up ^ The YWCA magazine, Volumes 66-67. 1972. p. 46.
24.Jump up ^ The Church and the Gospel - Page 30, Jean Guitton - 1961
25.Jump up ^ "Paulinism." Random House Dictionary. Random House, 2011.
26.Jump up ^ Frank S. Billings (1894). "How shall the rich escape?". Arena Publishing. p. 114. "Theology has really never recognized individualism…founding itself on that soured brute, Paul of Tarsus, and really denying, like Peter, the nobler spirit of the gospels"
27.Jump up ^ Wittgenstein, as cited in Norman Malcolm. Wittgenstein: A Religious Point of View? London, Routledge, 1993. p.16
[hide]
v ·
t ·
e
Jesus
Historicity
Chronology of Jesus ·
Genealogy of Jesus ·
Historical Jesus (Quest for the historical Jesus ·
Portraits of the historical Jesus ·
Sources ·
Josephus on Jesus ·
Tacitus mention ·
Mara bar Serapion letter)
·
Historicity (Gospels)
Life
Birth (Nativity ·
Mary ·
Joseph)
·
Childhood ·
Unknown years ·
Baptism ·
Temptation ·
Apostles (selection ·
Great Commission)
·
Ministry ·
Sermon on the Mount (Plain)
·
Parables ·
Miracles ·
Transfiguration ·
Homelessness ·
Passion (arrest)
·
Crucifixion ·
Tomb ·
Resurrection ·
Ascension
New Testament
Gospels (Matthew ·
Mark ·
Luke ·
John ·
Gospel harmony ·
Oral gospel traditions)
·
Life of Jesus in the New Testament ·
Historical background of the New Testament ·
New Testament places associated with Jesus ·
Names and titles of Jesus in the New Testament
Culture
Language of Jesus ·
Bibliography ·
Race and appearance of Jesus
Christianity
Christ ·
Christianity ·
Christology ·
Depictions of Jesus (art)
·
Jesus in Christianity ·
Relics associated with Jesus ·
Scholastic Lutheran Christology ·
Second Coming of Christ ·
Session of Christ
Other views
Brothers of Jesus ·
Jesuism ·
Jesus in Ahmadiyya Islam ·
Jesus in comparative mythology (Christ myth theory)
·
Jesus in Islam ·
Jesus in Scientology ·
Judaism's view of Jesus (in the Talmud)
·
Master Jesus ·
Religious perspectives on Jesus ·
Criticism
Commons page Commons ·
Wikiquote page Wikiquote
Categories: Christian philosophy
Doctrines and teachings of Jesus
Christian terminology
Christian radicalism
Simple living
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Dansk
Português
Shqip
Edit links
This page was last modified on 1 April 2015, at 20:14.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesuism
Christian atheism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Part of a series on
Atheism
Atheismsymbol endorsed by AAI.svg
Concepts ·
History
[show]
Types[hide]
Implicit and explicit
Negative and positive
Christian ·
Hindu ·
Jewish
State atheism
Arguments for atheism[show]
People[show]
Related stances[show]
Portal icon Atheism portal ·
WikiProject
v ·
t ·
e
Part of a series on
Christianity
Jesus depicted as the Good Shepherd
Jesus ·
Christ
[show]
Bible ·
Foundations
[show]
Theology[show]
History ·
Tradition
[show]
Related topics[show]
Denominations ·
Groups
[show]
Christian cross Christianity portal
v ·
t ·
e
Christian atheism is a theological position in which the belief in the transcendent or interventionist God is rejected or absent in favor of finding God totally in the world (Thomas J. J. Altizer) or following Jesus in a Godless world (William Hamilton). Hamilton's Christian atheism is similar to Jesuism.
Contents [hide]
1 Beliefs
2 God's existence
3 Dealing with culture
4 Separation from the church
5 The centrality of Jesus
6 By denomination 6.1 Protestantism
6.2 Roman Catholic
7 Criticisms
8 See also
9 References
10 Further reading
11 External links
Beliefs[edit]
Thomas Ogletree, Frederick Marquand Professor of Ethics and Religious Studies at Yale Divinity School, lists these four common beliefs:[1][2]
1.The assertion of the unreality of God for our age, including the understandings of God which have been a part of traditional Christian theology
2.The insistence upon coming to grips with contemporary culture as a necessary feature of responsible theological work
3.Varying degrees and forms of alienation from the church as it is now constituted
4.Recognition of the centrality of the person of Jesus in theological reflection
God's existence[edit]
According to Paul van Buren, a Death of God theologian, the word God itself is "either meaningless or misleading".[2] He contends that it is impossible to think about God. Van Buren says that
"we cannot identify anything which will count for or against the truth of our statements concerning 'God'".[2]
The inference from these claims to the "either meaningless or misleading" conclusion is implicitly premised on the verificationist theory of meaning. Most Christian atheists believe that God never existed, but there are a few who believe in the death of God literally.[3] Thomas J. J. Altizer is a well-known Christian atheist who is known for his literal approach to the death of God. He often speaks of God's death as a redemptive event. In his book The Gospel of Christian Atheism he speaks of how
"every man today who is open to experience knows that God is absent, but only the Christian knows that God is dead, that the death of God is a final and irrevocable event, and that God's death has actualized in our history a new and liberated humanity".[4]
Dealing with culture[edit]
Theologians including Altizer and Lyas looked at the scientific, empirical culture of today and tried to find religion's place in it. In Altizer's words,
"No longer can faith and the world exist in mutual isolation…the radical Christian condemns all forms of faith that are disengaged with the world."[4]
He goes on to say that our response to atheism should be one of "acceptance and affirmation".[4] Colin Lyas, a Philosophy lecturer at Lancaster University, stated that
"Christian atheists are united also in the belief that any satisfactory answer to these problems must be an answer that will make life tolerable in this world, here and now and which will direct attention to the social and other problems of this life."[3]
Separation from the church[edit]
Altizer has said that
"the radical Christian... believes that the ecclesiastical tradition has ceased to be Christian".[4]
He believed that orthodox Christianity no longer had any meaning to people because it did not discuss Christianity within the context of contemporary theology. Christian atheists want to be completely separated from most orthodox Christian beliefs and biblical traditions.[5] Altizer states that a faith will not be completely pure if it is open to modern culture. This faith "can never identify itself with an ecclesiastical tradition or with a given doctrinal or ritual form." He goes on to say that faith cannot "have any final assurance as to what it means to be a Christian".[4] Altizer said, "We must not, he says, seek for the sacred by saying 'no' to the radical profanity of our age, but by saying 'yes' to it".[5] They see religions which withdraw from the world as moving away from truth. This is part of the reason why they see the existence of God as counter-progressive. Altizer wrote of God as the enemy to man because mankind could never reach its fullest potential while God existed.[4] He went on to state that "to cling to the Christian God in our time is to evade the human situation of our century and to renounce the inevitable suffering which is its lot".[4]
The centrality of Jesus[edit]
6th-century mosaic of Jesus at Basilica of Sant'Apollinare Nuovo in Ravenna.
See also: Jesusism
Jesus is still a central feature of Christian atheism. Although, Hamilton said that to the Christian atheist, Jesus is not really the foundation of faith; instead, he is a "place to be, a standpoint".[5] Christian atheists look to Jesus as an example of what a Christian should be, but they do not see him as God.
Hamilton wrote that following Jesus means being "alongside the neighbor, being for him",[5] and that to follow Jesus means to be human, to help other humans, and to further humankind.
Other Christian atheists such as Thomas Altizer preserve the divinity of Jesus, arguing that through him God negates God's transcendence of being.
By denomination[edit]
Protestantism[edit]
In the Netherlands, 42% of the members of the Protestant Church in the Netherlands (PKN) are nontheists.[6] Non-belief among clergymen is not always perceived as a problem. Some follow the tradition of “Christian non-realism,” most famously expounded in the UK by Don Cupitt in the 1980s, which holds that God is a symbol or metaphor and that religious language is not matched by a transcendent reality. According to a investigation of 860 pastors in seven Dutch Protestant denominations, 1 in 6 clergy are either agnostic or atheist. In one of those denominations, the Remonstrant Brotherhood, the number of doubters was 42 percent.[7][8] A minister of the PKN, Klaas Hendrikse has described God as "a word for experience, or human experience" and said that Jesus may have never existed. Hendrikse gained attention with his book published in November 2007, in which he said that it was not necessary to believe in God's existence in order to believe in 'God'. The Dutch title of the book translates as, 'Believing in a God who does not exist: manifesto of an atheist pastor'. Hendrikse writes in the book. 'God is for me not a being but a word for what can happen between people. Someone says to you, for example, 'I will not abandon you', and then makes those words come true. It would be perfectly alright to call that [relationship] God.' A General Synod found Klaas Hendrikse's views were widely shared among both clergy and church members. The February 3, 2010 decision to allow Hendrikse to continue working as a pastor followed the advice of a regional supervisory panel that the statements by Hendrikse, “are not of sufficient weight to damage the foundations of the Church. The ideas of Hendrikse are theologically not new, and are in keeping with the liberal tradition that is an integral part of our church,” the special panel concluded.[7]
Roman Catholic[edit]
Catholic atheism is a belief in which the culture, traditions, rituals, and norms of Catholicism are accepted, but the existence of God is rejected. It is illustrated in Miguel de Unamuno's novel San Manuel Bueno, Mártir (1930). According to research in 2007, only 27% of Catholics in the Netherlands considered themselves theist, while 55% were ietsist or agnostic deist, and 17% were agnostic or atheist. Many Dutch people still affiliate with the term "Catholic", and use it within certain traditions as a basis of their cultural identity, rather than as a religious identity. The vast majority of the Catholic population in the Netherlands is now largely irreligious in practice.[6]
Criticisms[edit]
In his book Mere Christianity, the apologist C. S. Lewis would object to Hamilton's version of Christian Atheism and the claim that Jesus was merely a moral guide:
"I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: 'I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept his claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronising nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to. ... Now it seems to me obvious that He was neither a lunatic nor a fiend: and consequently, however strange or terrifying or unlikely it may seem, I have to accept the view that He was and is God."
Lewis's argument, now known as Lewis's Trilemma, has been criticized for, among other things, constituting a false trilemma. As philosopher John Beversluis argues, Lewis "deprives his readers of numerous alternate interpretations of Jesus that carry with them no such odious implications."[9]
See also[edit]
Portal icon Christianity portal
Portal icon Atheism portal
Asimov's Guide to the Bible
Christian communism
Christ myth theory
Cultural Christian
Death of God theology
Demythologization
Don Cupitt
Jefferson Bible
Jesuism
Lloyd Geering
Luboš Motl
Nontheist Friends
Nontheistic religions
Postchristianity
Robert Jensen
Robert M. Price
Sea of Faith
Thorkild Grosbøll
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Ogletree, Thomas. "professor at Yale University". Retrieved 21 August 2013.
2.^ Jump up to: a b c Ogletree, Thomas W. The Death of God Controversy. New York: Abingdon Press, 1966.
3.^ Jump up to: a b Lyas, Colin. "On the Coherence of Christian Atheism." The Journal of the Royal Institute of Philosophy 45(171): 1970.
4.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g Altizer, Thomas J. J. The Gospel of Christian Atheism. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1966.
5.^ Jump up to: a b c d Altizer, Thomas J. J. and William Hamilton. Radical Theology and The Death of God. New York: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc.,1966.
6.^ Jump up to: a b God in Nederland' (1996-2006), by Ronald Meester, G. Dekker, ISBN 9789025957407
7.^ Jump up to: a b Pigott, Robert (5 August 2011). "Dutch rethink Christianity for a doubtful world". BBC News. Retrieved 2 October 2011.
8.Jump up ^ http://www.albertmohler.com/2009/03/31/does-your-pastor-believe-in-god-2/
9.Jump up ^ John Beversluis, C.S. Lewis and the Search for Rational Religion (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), p 56.
Further reading[edit]
Soury, M. Joles (1910). Un athée catholique. E. Vitte. ASIN B001BQPY7G.
Altizer, Thomas J. J. (2002). The New Gospel of Christian Atheism. The Davies Group. ISBN 1-888570-65-2.
Hamilton, William, A Quest for the Post-Historical Jesus, (London, New York: Continuum International Publishing Group, 1994). ISBN 978-0-8264-0641-5
External links[edit]
Wikiquote has quotations related to: Christian atheism
Atheists for Jesus
Categories: Atheism
Christianity and other religions
Death of God theology
Christian theological movements
Radical theology
Christianity and society
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Català
Dansk
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
مصرى
Português
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Svenska
Tiếng Việt
Edit links
This page was last modified on 16 June 2015, at 18:59.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_atheism
Christian atheism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Part of a series on
Atheism
Atheismsymbol endorsed by AAI.svg
Concepts ·
History
[show]
Types[hide]
Implicit and explicit
Negative and positive
Christian ·
Hindu ·
Jewish
State atheism
Arguments for atheism[show]
People[show]
Related stances[show]
Portal icon Atheism portal ·
WikiProject
v ·
t ·
e
Part of a series on
Christianity
Jesus depicted as the Good Shepherd
Jesus ·
Christ
[show]
Bible ·
Foundations
[show]
Theology[show]
History ·
Tradition
[show]
Related topics[show]
Denominations ·
Groups
[show]
Christian cross Christianity portal
v ·
t ·
e
Christian atheism is a theological position in which the belief in the transcendent or interventionist God is rejected or absent in favor of finding God totally in the world (Thomas J. J. Altizer) or following Jesus in a Godless world (William Hamilton). Hamilton's Christian atheism is similar to Jesuism.
Contents [hide]
1 Beliefs
2 God's existence
3 Dealing with culture
4 Separation from the church
5 The centrality of Jesus
6 By denomination 6.1 Protestantism
6.2 Roman Catholic
7 Criticisms
8 See also
9 References
10 Further reading
11 External links
Beliefs[edit]
Thomas Ogletree, Frederick Marquand Professor of Ethics and Religious Studies at Yale Divinity School, lists these four common beliefs:[1][2]
1.The assertion of the unreality of God for our age, including the understandings of God which have been a part of traditional Christian theology
2.The insistence upon coming to grips with contemporary culture as a necessary feature of responsible theological work
3.Varying degrees and forms of alienation from the church as it is now constituted
4.Recognition of the centrality of the person of Jesus in theological reflection
God's existence[edit]
According to Paul van Buren, a Death of God theologian, the word God itself is "either meaningless or misleading".[2] He contends that it is impossible to think about God. Van Buren says that
"we cannot identify anything which will count for or against the truth of our statements concerning 'God'".[2]
The inference from these claims to the "either meaningless or misleading" conclusion is implicitly premised on the verificationist theory of meaning. Most Christian atheists believe that God never existed, but there are a few who believe in the death of God literally.[3] Thomas J. J. Altizer is a well-known Christian atheist who is known for his literal approach to the death of God. He often speaks of God's death as a redemptive event. In his book The Gospel of Christian Atheism he speaks of how
"every man today who is open to experience knows that God is absent, but only the Christian knows that God is dead, that the death of God is a final and irrevocable event, and that God's death has actualized in our history a new and liberated humanity".[4]
Dealing with culture[edit]
Theologians including Altizer and Lyas looked at the scientific, empirical culture of today and tried to find religion's place in it. In Altizer's words,
"No longer can faith and the world exist in mutual isolation…the radical Christian condemns all forms of faith that are disengaged with the world."[4]
He goes on to say that our response to atheism should be one of "acceptance and affirmation".[4] Colin Lyas, a Philosophy lecturer at Lancaster University, stated that
"Christian atheists are united also in the belief that any satisfactory answer to these problems must be an answer that will make life tolerable in this world, here and now and which will direct attention to the social and other problems of this life."[3]
Separation from the church[edit]
Altizer has said that
"the radical Christian... believes that the ecclesiastical tradition has ceased to be Christian".[4]
He believed that orthodox Christianity no longer had any meaning to people because it did not discuss Christianity within the context of contemporary theology. Christian atheists want to be completely separated from most orthodox Christian beliefs and biblical traditions.[5] Altizer states that a faith will not be completely pure if it is open to modern culture. This faith "can never identify itself with an ecclesiastical tradition or with a given doctrinal or ritual form." He goes on to say that faith cannot "have any final assurance as to what it means to be a Christian".[4] Altizer said, "We must not, he says, seek for the sacred by saying 'no' to the radical profanity of our age, but by saying 'yes' to it".[5] They see religions which withdraw from the world as moving away from truth. This is part of the reason why they see the existence of God as counter-progressive. Altizer wrote of God as the enemy to man because mankind could never reach its fullest potential while God existed.[4] He went on to state that "to cling to the Christian God in our time is to evade the human situation of our century and to renounce the inevitable suffering which is its lot".[4]
The centrality of Jesus[edit]
6th-century mosaic of Jesus at Basilica of Sant'Apollinare Nuovo in Ravenna.
See also: Jesusism
Jesus is still a central feature of Christian atheism. Although, Hamilton said that to the Christian atheist, Jesus is not really the foundation of faith; instead, he is a "place to be, a standpoint".[5] Christian atheists look to Jesus as an example of what a Christian should be, but they do not see him as God.
Hamilton wrote that following Jesus means being "alongside the neighbor, being for him",[5] and that to follow Jesus means to be human, to help other humans, and to further humankind.
Other Christian atheists such as Thomas Altizer preserve the divinity of Jesus, arguing that through him God negates God's transcendence of being.
By denomination[edit]
Protestantism[edit]
In the Netherlands, 42% of the members of the Protestant Church in the Netherlands (PKN) are nontheists.[6] Non-belief among clergymen is not always perceived as a problem. Some follow the tradition of “Christian non-realism,” most famously expounded in the UK by Don Cupitt in the 1980s, which holds that God is a symbol or metaphor and that religious language is not matched by a transcendent reality. According to a investigation of 860 pastors in seven Dutch Protestant denominations, 1 in 6 clergy are either agnostic or atheist. In one of those denominations, the Remonstrant Brotherhood, the number of doubters was 42 percent.[7][8] A minister of the PKN, Klaas Hendrikse has described God as "a word for experience, or human experience" and said that Jesus may have never existed. Hendrikse gained attention with his book published in November 2007, in which he said that it was not necessary to believe in God's existence in order to believe in 'God'. The Dutch title of the book translates as, 'Believing in a God who does not exist: manifesto of an atheist pastor'. Hendrikse writes in the book. 'God is for me not a being but a word for what can happen between people. Someone says to you, for example, 'I will not abandon you', and then makes those words come true. It would be perfectly alright to call that [relationship] God.' A General Synod found Klaas Hendrikse's views were widely shared among both clergy and church members. The February 3, 2010 decision to allow Hendrikse to continue working as a pastor followed the advice of a regional supervisory panel that the statements by Hendrikse, “are not of sufficient weight to damage the foundations of the Church. The ideas of Hendrikse are theologically not new, and are in keeping with the liberal tradition that is an integral part of our church,” the special panel concluded.[7]
Roman Catholic[edit]
Catholic atheism is a belief in which the culture, traditions, rituals, and norms of Catholicism are accepted, but the existence of God is rejected. It is illustrated in Miguel de Unamuno's novel San Manuel Bueno, Mártir (1930). According to research in 2007, only 27% of Catholics in the Netherlands considered themselves theist, while 55% were ietsist or agnostic deist, and 17% were agnostic or atheist. Many Dutch people still affiliate with the term "Catholic", and use it within certain traditions as a basis of their cultural identity, rather than as a religious identity. The vast majority of the Catholic population in the Netherlands is now largely irreligious in practice.[6]
Criticisms[edit]
In his book Mere Christianity, the apologist C. S. Lewis would object to Hamilton's version of Christian Atheism and the claim that Jesus was merely a moral guide:
"I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: 'I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept his claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronising nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to. ... Now it seems to me obvious that He was neither a lunatic nor a fiend: and consequently, however strange or terrifying or unlikely it may seem, I have to accept the view that He was and is God."
Lewis's argument, now known as Lewis's Trilemma, has been criticized for, among other things, constituting a false trilemma. As philosopher John Beversluis argues, Lewis "deprives his readers of numerous alternate interpretations of Jesus that carry with them no such odious implications."[9]
See also[edit]
Portal icon Christianity portal
Portal icon Atheism portal
Asimov's Guide to the Bible
Christian communism
Christ myth theory
Cultural Christian
Death of God theology
Demythologization
Don Cupitt
Jefferson Bible
Jesuism
Lloyd Geering
Luboš Motl
Nontheist Friends
Nontheistic religions
Postchristianity
Robert Jensen
Robert M. Price
Sea of Faith
Thorkild Grosbøll
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Ogletree, Thomas. "professor at Yale University". Retrieved 21 August 2013.
2.^ Jump up to: a b c Ogletree, Thomas W. The Death of God Controversy. New York: Abingdon Press, 1966.
3.^ Jump up to: a b Lyas, Colin. "On the Coherence of Christian Atheism." The Journal of the Royal Institute of Philosophy 45(171): 1970.
4.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g Altizer, Thomas J. J. The Gospel of Christian Atheism. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1966.
5.^ Jump up to: a b c d Altizer, Thomas J. J. and William Hamilton. Radical Theology and The Death of God. New York: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc.,1966.
6.^ Jump up to: a b God in Nederland' (1996-2006), by Ronald Meester, G. Dekker, ISBN 9789025957407
7.^ Jump up to: a b Pigott, Robert (5 August 2011). "Dutch rethink Christianity for a doubtful world". BBC News. Retrieved 2 October 2011.
8.Jump up ^ http://www.albertmohler.com/2009/03/31/does-your-pastor-believe-in-god-2/
9.Jump up ^ John Beversluis, C.S. Lewis and the Search for Rational Religion (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), p 56.
Further reading[edit]
Soury, M. Joles (1910). Un athée catholique. E. Vitte. ASIN B001BQPY7G.
Altizer, Thomas J. J. (2002). The New Gospel of Christian Atheism. The Davies Group. ISBN 1-888570-65-2.
Hamilton, William, A Quest for the Post-Historical Jesus, (London, New York: Continuum International Publishing Group, 1994). ISBN 978-0-8264-0641-5
External links[edit]
Wikiquote has quotations related to: Christian atheism
Atheists for Jesus
Categories: Atheism
Christianity and other religions
Death of God theology
Christian theological movements
Radical theology
Christianity and society
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Català
Dansk
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
مصرى
Português
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Svenska
Tiếng Việt
Edit links
This page was last modified on 16 June 2015, at 18:59.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_atheism
Death of God theology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Part of a series on
Christianity
Jesus depicted as the Good Shepherd
Jesus ·
Christ
[show]
Bible ·
Foundations
[show]
Theology[show]
History ·
Tradition
[show]
Related topics[show]
Denominations ·
Groups
[show]
Christian cross Christianity portal
v ·
t ·
e
Part of a series on
Atheism
Atheismsymbol endorsed by AAI.svg
Concepts ·
History
[show]
Types[show]
Arguments for atheism[show]
People[show]
Related stances[show]
Portal icon Atheism portal ·
WikiProject
v ·
t ·
e
Death of God theology is a predominately Christian theological movement, origination in the 1960's in which God is posited as having ceased to exist, often at the crucifixion. It can also refer to a theology which includes a disbelief in traditional theism, especially in light of increasing secularism in parts of the West. The Death of God movement is sometimes technically referred to as "theothanatology," deriving from the Greek theos (God) and thanatos (death). The main proponents of this radical theology included the Christian theologians Gabriel Vahanian, Paul Van Buren, William Hamilton, John A.T. Robinson, Thomas J. J. Altizer, John D. Caputo, the rabbi Richard L. Rubenstein, and Peter Rollins.
Contents [hide]
1 History 1.1 Mysticism
1.2 19th-century philosophy
1.3 20th-century philosophy and theology
2 Theology 2.1 Secularism
2.2 God's existence
3 Time Magazine cover
4 See also
5 Further reading
6 References
7 External links
History[edit]
Mysticism[edit]
Gnome-searchtool.svg This section's factual accuracy is disputed. (April 2014)
Early traces of themes which would reemerge in the Death of God theology can be found in the work of the great Christian mystics. Drawing upon the Neoplatonism of Plotinus, Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite's Mystical Theology speaks of a God "that transcends all being," that is to say, does not properly exist.[1] This emphasis upon a God who is "beyond Being" would continue into the high Middle Ages appearing in the works of Nicholas of Cusa, Meister Eckhart, and John of the Cross, among many others.
The theme of God's "death" became considerably more explicit in the theosophism of the 18th and 19th century mystic William Blake. In his intricately engraved illuminated books, Blake sought to throw off the dogmatism of his contemporary Christianity and, guided by a lifetime of vivid visions, examine the dark, destructive, and apocalyptic undercurrent of theology. Most notably, Blake refused to view the crucifixion of Jesus as a simple bodily death, and rather, saw in this event a kenosis, a self-emptying of God. As Altizer writes, Blake "celebrates a cosmic and historical movement of the Godhead that culminates in the death of God himself."[2]
19th-century philosophy[edit]
In the 19th century, Death of God thought entered philosophical consciousness through the work of German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Drawing upon the mysticism of Jakob Böhme and the Idealism of Johann Gottlieb Fichte and Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling, Hegel sought to revise Immanuel Kant's Idealism through the introduction of a dialectical methodology. Adapting this dialectic to the chief theological problem, the nature of God, Hegel argued that God (as Absolute or Father) is radically negated by the concrete incarnation of God (as Christ or Son). This negation is subsequently itself negated at the Crucifixion of Jesus, resulting in the emergence of the Holy Spirit, God as both concrete (the church) and absolute (spiritual community). In Hegelian thought, therefore, the death of God does not result in a strict negativity, but rather, permits the emergence of the full revelation of God: Absolute Consciousness.[3]
One of the more notable out of the Death of God philosophers was the German philosopher and proto-existentialist Friedrich Nietzsche, who was largely responsible for bringing the phrase "God is Dead" (German: About this sound "Gott ist tot" (help·info)) into public consciousness. This phrase first appears in The Gay Science (German: Die fröhliche Wissenschaft), in sections 108 (New Struggles), 125 (The Madman), and for a third time in section 343 (The Meaning of our Cheerfulness). It is also found in Nietzsche's work Thus Spoke Zarathustra (German: Also sprach Zarathustra), which is most responsible for popularizing the phrase. The idea is stated in "The Madman" as follows:
God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. Yet his shadow still looms. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?
—Nietzsche, The Gay Science, Section 125, tr. Walter Kaufmann[4]
20th-century philosophy and theology[edit]
Though he preceded the formal Death of God movement, the prominent 20th-century Protestant theologian Paul Tillich remains highly influential in the field. Drawing upon the work of Friedrich Nietzsche, Friedrich Schelling, and Jacob Boehme, Tillich developed a notion of God as the "ground of Being" and the response to nihilism.[5] Central to this notion was Tillich's rejection of traditional theism and insistence upon a "God above the God of theism." In The Courage to Be he writes:
The courage to take the anxiety of meaninglessness upon oneself is the boundary line up to which the courage to be can go. Beyond it is mere non-being. Within it all forms of courage are re-established in the power of the God above the God of theism. The courage to be is rooted in the God who appears when God has disappeared in the anxiety of doubt.[6]
In 1961, Gianni Vahanian's The Death of God was published. Vahanian argued that modern secular culture had lost all sense of the sacred, lacking any sacramental meaning, no transcendental purpose or sense of providence. He concluded that for the modern mind "God is dead". In Vahanian's vision a transformed post-Christian and post-modern culture was needed to create a renewed experience of deity.
Altizer offered a radical theology of the death of God that drew upon William Blake, Hegelian thought and Nietzschean ideas. He conceived of theology as a form of poetry in which the immanence (presence) of God could be encountered in faith communities. However, he no longer accepted the possibility of affirming belief in a transcendent God. Altizer concluded that God had incarnated in Christ and imparted his immanent spirit which remained in the world even though Jesus was dead. Unlike Nietzsche, Altizer believed that God truly died. He is considered to be the leading exponent of the Death of God movement.
Richard L. Rubenstein represented that radical edge of Jewish thought working through the impact of the Holocaust. In a technical sense he maintained, based on the Kabbalah, that God had "died" in creating the world. However, for modern Jewish culture he argued that the death of God occurred in Auschwitz. Although the literal death of God did not occur at this point, this was the moment in time in which humanity was awakened to the idea that a theistic God may not exist. In Rubenstein's work, it was no longer possible to believe in an orthodox/traditional theistic God of the Abrahamic covenant; rather, God is a historical process.[7]
Although the direct linkage between the Lacanian-Marxist critical theory of Slavoj Žižek and Death of God thought is not immediately apparent, his explicitly Hegelian reading of Christianity, defended most conspicuously in the 2009 The Monstrosity of Christ, strongly lends itself to this tradition. Strongly influenced by both Dietrich Bonhoeffer and G.K. Chesterton, Žižek advocates a variant of christian atheism, more or less strongly depending upon context. As early as Adam Kotsko's 2008 Žižek and Theology a direct linkage between Žižek and this tradition has been maintained. Initially, reviewers vigorously rejected this connection, but following the publication of The Monstrosity of Christ as well as subsequent co-paneled sessions,[8] the direct relation between Žižek and Thomas Altizer has become clear.[9]
Theology[edit]
Secularism[edit]
See also: Current issues in secularization
Vahanian, Van Buren, and Hamilton agree that the concept of transcendence had lost any meaningful place in modern thought. According to the norms of contemporary modern thought, God is dead. In responding to this collapse of transcendence, Vahanian proposes a radically post-Christian alternative to traditional theism. Van Buren and Hamilton offered secular people the option of Jesus as the model human who acted in love. The encounter with the Christ of faith would be open in a church-community.
God's existence[edit]
To what extent God may properly be understood as "dead" is highly debated among death of God theologians. In its strongest forms, God is said to have literally died, often as incarnated on the cross or at the moment of creation. Thomas J.J. Altizer remains the clearest proponent of this perspective. Weaker forms of this theological bent often posit this "death" as a metaphor or existential recognition of God's existence outside of (or beyond) Being.
Time Magazine cover[edit]
Time magazine's cover on April 8, 1966.
The cover of the April 8, 1966 edition of Time magazine asked the question "Is God Dead?"[10] and the accompanying article addressed growing atheism in America at the time, as well as the growing popularity of Death of God theology. [11]
See also[edit]
Atheism
Christian atheism
Christian theology
Demythologization
God is dead
Postchristianity
Secular theology
Further reading[edit]
Altizer, Thomas J. J. (1967). The Altizer-Montgomery Dialogue a Chapter in the God is Dead Controversy. Inter-Varsity Press.
Altizer, Thomas J. J. (2002). The New Gospel of Christian Atheism. The Davies Group. ISBN 1-888570-65-2.
Altizer, J. J. and William Hamilton (1966). Radical Theology and the Death of God. Bobbs-Merrill.
Blake, William (2001). William Blake: The Complete Illuminated Books. Thames & Hudson. ISBN 0500282455.
Caputo, John D., Gianni Vattimo (2007). After the Death of God. Columbia University. ISBN 978-0231141253.
Hamilton, William (1994). A Quest for the Post-Historical Jesus. Continuum International publishing Group. ISBN 978-0826406415.
Hegel, G.W.F. (1977). Phenomenology of Spirit. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0198245971.
Heidegger, Martin (2002). The Word of Nietzsche: 'God Is Dead' in Holzwege, edited and translated by Julian Young and Kenneth Haynes. Cambridge University Press.
Ice, Jackson, and Carey, J. ed. (1967). The Death of God Debate. Westminster Press.
Kaufmann, Walter (1974). Nietzsche: Philosopher, Psychologist, Antichrist. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0691019833.
Montgomery, J. (1966). The `Is God Dead?’ Controversy. Zondervan.
Murchland, Bernard (1967). The Meaning of the Death of God. Random House.
Nietzsche, Friedrich (1974). The Gay Science. Vintage. ISBN 978-0394719856.
Nietzsche, Friedrich (1977). The Portable Nietzsche. Penguin Books. ISBN 978-0140150629.
Pseudo-Dionysius (1988). The Complete Works. Paulist Press. ISBN 0809128381.
Roberts, Tyler T. (1998). Contesting Spirit: Nietzsche, Affirmation, Religion. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0691059372.
Tillich, Paul (1952). The Courage to Be. Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0300084719.
Vahanian, Gabriel (1961). The Death of God: The Culture of our Post-Christian Era. George Braziller. ISBN 1606089846.
Van Til, Cornelius (1966). Is God Dead?. Presbyterian and Reformed.
Žižek, Slavoj (2009). The Monstrosity of Christ: Paradox or Dialectic?. The MIT Press. ISBN 0262012715.
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite. "The Mystical Theology"
2.Jump up ^ William Blake and the Role of Myth in the Radical Christian Vision, Thomas J.J. Altizer
3.Jump up ^ The Deaths of God in Hegel and Nietzsche and the Crisis of Values in Secular Modernity and Post-secular Postmodernity, WIlliam Franke
4.Jump up ^ Friedrich Nietzsche. "The Madman" in The Gay Science trans. Walter Kaufman (New York: Vintage, 1974)
5.Jump up ^ Paul Tillich, The Courage to Be (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1952)
6.Jump up ^ ibid, 190.
7.Jump up ^ Richard L. Rubenstein. "God After the Death of God" in After Auschwitz: History, Theology, and Contemporary Judaism. 2nd. ed (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992), 293–306
8.Jump up ^ "Whither the 'Death of God': A Continuing Currency?"
9.Jump up ^ Adam Kotsko, "And Fur Sich 'Altizer as the third rail of academic theology'"
10.Jump up ^ Time Magazine, Is God Dead?, April 8, 1966
11.Jump up ^ Alister McGrath. Christian Theology: An Introduction. 2nd ed. (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers), 255
External links[edit]
John M. Frame, "Death of God Theology"
Austin Cline, "Nihilism and Christianity: Death of God Theology"
"The reality is near - Let's Wake up Together"
[hide]
v ·
t ·
e
Philosophers and theologians associated with Death of God theology
Thomas J. J. Altizer ·
William Blake ·
Paul van Buren ·
John D. Caputo ·
Meister Eckhart ·
William Hamilton ·
G. W. F. Hegel ·
Friedrich Nietzsche ·
Pseudo-Dionysius ·
John Robinson ·
Richard L. Rubenstein ·
Paul Tillich ·
Gabriel Vahanian ·
Gianni Vattimo ·
Slavoj Žižek
Categories: Atheism
Death of God theology
Christian theological movements
Radical theology
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Deutsch
Español
Italiano
Português
Svenska
Edit links
This page was last modified on 21 April 2015, at 00:53.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_God_theology
Death of God theology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Part of a series on
Christianity
Jesus depicted as the Good Shepherd
Jesus ·
Christ
[show]
Bible ·
Foundations
[show]
Theology[show]
History ·
Tradition
[show]
Related topics[show]
Denominations ·
Groups
[show]
Christian cross Christianity portal
v ·
t ·
e
Part of a series on
Atheism
Atheismsymbol endorsed by AAI.svg
Concepts ·
History
[show]
Types[show]
Arguments for atheism[show]
People[show]
Related stances[show]
Portal icon Atheism portal ·
WikiProject
v ·
t ·
e
Death of God theology is a predominately Christian theological movement, origination in the 1960's in which God is posited as having ceased to exist, often at the crucifixion. It can also refer to a theology which includes a disbelief in traditional theism, especially in light of increasing secularism in parts of the West. The Death of God movement is sometimes technically referred to as "theothanatology," deriving from the Greek theos (God) and thanatos (death). The main proponents of this radical theology included the Christian theologians Gabriel Vahanian, Paul Van Buren, William Hamilton, John A.T. Robinson, Thomas J. J. Altizer, John D. Caputo, the rabbi Richard L. Rubenstein, and Peter Rollins.
Contents [hide]
1 History 1.1 Mysticism
1.2 19th-century philosophy
1.3 20th-century philosophy and theology
2 Theology 2.1 Secularism
2.2 God's existence
3 Time Magazine cover
4 See also
5 Further reading
6 References
7 External links
History[edit]
Mysticism[edit]
Gnome-searchtool.svg This section's factual accuracy is disputed. (April 2014)
Early traces of themes which would reemerge in the Death of God theology can be found in the work of the great Christian mystics. Drawing upon the Neoplatonism of Plotinus, Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite's Mystical Theology speaks of a God "that transcends all being," that is to say, does not properly exist.[1] This emphasis upon a God who is "beyond Being" would continue into the high Middle Ages appearing in the works of Nicholas of Cusa, Meister Eckhart, and John of the Cross, among many others.
The theme of God's "death" became considerably more explicit in the theosophism of the 18th and 19th century mystic William Blake. In his intricately engraved illuminated books, Blake sought to throw off the dogmatism of his contemporary Christianity and, guided by a lifetime of vivid visions, examine the dark, destructive, and apocalyptic undercurrent of theology. Most notably, Blake refused to view the crucifixion of Jesus as a simple bodily death, and rather, saw in this event a kenosis, a self-emptying of God. As Altizer writes, Blake "celebrates a cosmic and historical movement of the Godhead that culminates in the death of God himself."[2]
19th-century philosophy[edit]
In the 19th century, Death of God thought entered philosophical consciousness through the work of German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Drawing upon the mysticism of Jakob Böhme and the Idealism of Johann Gottlieb Fichte and Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling, Hegel sought to revise Immanuel Kant's Idealism through the introduction of a dialectical methodology. Adapting this dialectic to the chief theological problem, the nature of God, Hegel argued that God (as Absolute or Father) is radically negated by the concrete incarnation of God (as Christ or Son). This negation is subsequently itself negated at the Crucifixion of Jesus, resulting in the emergence of the Holy Spirit, God as both concrete (the church) and absolute (spiritual community). In Hegelian thought, therefore, the death of God does not result in a strict negativity, but rather, permits the emergence of the full revelation of God: Absolute Consciousness.[3]
One of the more notable out of the Death of God philosophers was the German philosopher and proto-existentialist Friedrich Nietzsche, who was largely responsible for bringing the phrase "God is Dead" (German: About this sound "Gott ist tot" (help·info)) into public consciousness. This phrase first appears in The Gay Science (German: Die fröhliche Wissenschaft), in sections 108 (New Struggles), 125 (The Madman), and for a third time in section 343 (The Meaning of our Cheerfulness). It is also found in Nietzsche's work Thus Spoke Zarathustra (German: Also sprach Zarathustra), which is most responsible for popularizing the phrase. The idea is stated in "The Madman" as follows:
God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. Yet his shadow still looms. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?
—Nietzsche, The Gay Science, Section 125, tr. Walter Kaufmann[4]
20th-century philosophy and theology[edit]
Though he preceded the formal Death of God movement, the prominent 20th-century Protestant theologian Paul Tillich remains highly influential in the field. Drawing upon the work of Friedrich Nietzsche, Friedrich Schelling, and Jacob Boehme, Tillich developed a notion of God as the "ground of Being" and the response to nihilism.[5] Central to this notion was Tillich's rejection of traditional theism and insistence upon a "God above the God of theism." In The Courage to Be he writes:
The courage to take the anxiety of meaninglessness upon oneself is the boundary line up to which the courage to be can go. Beyond it is mere non-being. Within it all forms of courage are re-established in the power of the God above the God of theism. The courage to be is rooted in the God who appears when God has disappeared in the anxiety of doubt.[6]
In 1961, Gianni Vahanian's The Death of God was published. Vahanian argued that modern secular culture had lost all sense of the sacred, lacking any sacramental meaning, no transcendental purpose or sense of providence. He concluded that for the modern mind "God is dead". In Vahanian's vision a transformed post-Christian and post-modern culture was needed to create a renewed experience of deity.
Altizer offered a radical theology of the death of God that drew upon William Blake, Hegelian thought and Nietzschean ideas. He conceived of theology as a form of poetry in which the immanence (presence) of God could be encountered in faith communities. However, he no longer accepted the possibility of affirming belief in a transcendent God. Altizer concluded that God had incarnated in Christ and imparted his immanent spirit which remained in the world even though Jesus was dead. Unlike Nietzsche, Altizer believed that God truly died. He is considered to be the leading exponent of the Death of God movement.
Richard L. Rubenstein represented that radical edge of Jewish thought working through the impact of the Holocaust. In a technical sense he maintained, based on the Kabbalah, that God had "died" in creating the world. However, for modern Jewish culture he argued that the death of God occurred in Auschwitz. Although the literal death of God did not occur at this point, this was the moment in time in which humanity was awakened to the idea that a theistic God may not exist. In Rubenstein's work, it was no longer possible to believe in an orthodox/traditional theistic God of the Abrahamic covenant; rather, God is a historical process.[7]
Although the direct linkage between the Lacanian-Marxist critical theory of Slavoj Žižek and Death of God thought is not immediately apparent, his explicitly Hegelian reading of Christianity, defended most conspicuously in the 2009 The Monstrosity of Christ, strongly lends itself to this tradition. Strongly influenced by both Dietrich Bonhoeffer and G.K. Chesterton, Žižek advocates a variant of christian atheism, more or less strongly depending upon context. As early as Adam Kotsko's 2008 Žižek and Theology a direct linkage between Žižek and this tradition has been maintained. Initially, reviewers vigorously rejected this connection, but following the publication of The Monstrosity of Christ as well as subsequent co-paneled sessions,[8] the direct relation between Žižek and Thomas Altizer has become clear.[9]
Theology[edit]
Secularism[edit]
See also: Current issues in secularization
Vahanian, Van Buren, and Hamilton agree that the concept of transcendence had lost any meaningful place in modern thought. According to the norms of contemporary modern thought, God is dead. In responding to this collapse of transcendence, Vahanian proposes a radically post-Christian alternative to traditional theism. Van Buren and Hamilton offered secular people the option of Jesus as the model human who acted in love. The encounter with the Christ of faith would be open in a church-community.
God's existence[edit]
To what extent God may properly be understood as "dead" is highly debated among death of God theologians. In its strongest forms, God is said to have literally died, often as incarnated on the cross or at the moment of creation. Thomas J.J. Altizer remains the clearest proponent of this perspective. Weaker forms of this theological bent often posit this "death" as a metaphor or existential recognition of God's existence outside of (or beyond) Being.
Time Magazine cover[edit]
Time magazine's cover on April 8, 1966.
The cover of the April 8, 1966 edition of Time magazine asked the question "Is God Dead?"[10] and the accompanying article addressed growing atheism in America at the time, as well as the growing popularity of Death of God theology. [11]
See also[edit]
Atheism
Christian atheism
Christian theology
Demythologization
God is dead
Postchristianity
Secular theology
Further reading[edit]
Altizer, Thomas J. J. (1967). The Altizer-Montgomery Dialogue a Chapter in the God is Dead Controversy. Inter-Varsity Press.
Altizer, Thomas J. J. (2002). The New Gospel of Christian Atheism. The Davies Group. ISBN 1-888570-65-2.
Altizer, J. J. and William Hamilton (1966). Radical Theology and the Death of God. Bobbs-Merrill.
Blake, William (2001). William Blake: The Complete Illuminated Books. Thames & Hudson. ISBN 0500282455.
Caputo, John D., Gianni Vattimo (2007). After the Death of God. Columbia University. ISBN 978-0231141253.
Hamilton, William (1994). A Quest for the Post-Historical Jesus. Continuum International publishing Group. ISBN 978-0826406415.
Hegel, G.W.F. (1977). Phenomenology of Spirit. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0198245971.
Heidegger, Martin (2002). The Word of Nietzsche: 'God Is Dead' in Holzwege, edited and translated by Julian Young and Kenneth Haynes. Cambridge University Press.
Ice, Jackson, and Carey, J. ed. (1967). The Death of God Debate. Westminster Press.
Kaufmann, Walter (1974). Nietzsche: Philosopher, Psychologist, Antichrist. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0691019833.
Montgomery, J. (1966). The `Is God Dead?’ Controversy. Zondervan.
Murchland, Bernard (1967). The Meaning of the Death of God. Random House.
Nietzsche, Friedrich (1974). The Gay Science. Vintage. ISBN 978-0394719856.
Nietzsche, Friedrich (1977). The Portable Nietzsche. Penguin Books. ISBN 978-0140150629.
Pseudo-Dionysius (1988). The Complete Works. Paulist Press. ISBN 0809128381.
Roberts, Tyler T. (1998). Contesting Spirit: Nietzsche, Affirmation, Religion. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0691059372.
Tillich, Paul (1952). The Courage to Be. Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0300084719.
Vahanian, Gabriel (1961). The Death of God: The Culture of our Post-Christian Era. George Braziller. ISBN 1606089846.
Van Til, Cornelius (1966). Is God Dead?. Presbyterian and Reformed.
Žižek, Slavoj (2009). The Monstrosity of Christ: Paradox or Dialectic?. The MIT Press. ISBN 0262012715.
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite. "The Mystical Theology"
2.Jump up ^ William Blake and the Role of Myth in the Radical Christian Vision, Thomas J.J. Altizer
3.Jump up ^ The Deaths of God in Hegel and Nietzsche and the Crisis of Values in Secular Modernity and Post-secular Postmodernity, WIlliam Franke
4.Jump up ^ Friedrich Nietzsche. "The Madman" in The Gay Science trans. Walter Kaufman (New York: Vintage, 1974)
5.Jump up ^ Paul Tillich, The Courage to Be (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1952)
6.Jump up ^ ibid, 190.
7.Jump up ^ Richard L. Rubenstein. "God After the Death of God" in After Auschwitz: History, Theology, and Contemporary Judaism. 2nd. ed (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992), 293–306
8.Jump up ^ "Whither the 'Death of God': A Continuing Currency?"
9.Jump up ^ Adam Kotsko, "And Fur Sich 'Altizer as the third rail of academic theology'"
10.Jump up ^ Time Magazine, Is God Dead?, April 8, 1966
11.Jump up ^ Alister McGrath. Christian Theology: An Introduction. 2nd ed. (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers), 255
External links[edit]
John M. Frame, "Death of God Theology"
Austin Cline, "Nihilism and Christianity: Death of God Theology"
"The reality is near - Let's Wake up Together"
[hide]
v ·
t ·
e
Philosophers and theologians associated with Death of God theology
Thomas J. J. Altizer ·
William Blake ·
Paul van Buren ·
John D. Caputo ·
Meister Eckhart ·
William Hamilton ·
G. W. F. Hegel ·
Friedrich Nietzsche ·
Pseudo-Dionysius ·
John Robinson ·
Richard L. Rubenstein ·
Paul Tillich ·
Gabriel Vahanian ·
Gianni Vattimo ·
Slavoj Žižek
Categories: Atheism
Death of God theology
Christian theological movements
Radical theology
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Deutsch
Español
Italiano
Português
Svenska
Edit links
This page was last modified on 21 April 2015, at 00:53.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_God_theology
Christian deism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
See also: Theistic rationalism
John Locke is often credited for his influence on Christian deism
Christian deism, in the philosophy of religion, is a standpoint that branches from Christianity. It refers to a deist who believes in the moral teachings—but not divinity—of Jesus. Corbett and Corbett (1999) cite John Adams and Thomas Jefferson as exemplars.[1] The earliest-found usage of the term Christian deism in print in English is in 1738 in a book by Thomas Morgan,[2] appearing about ten times by 1800.[3] The term Christian deist is found as early as 1722,[4][5] in Christianity vindicated against infidelity by Daniel Waterland (he calls it a misuse of language), and adopted later by Matthew Tindal in his 1730 work, Christianity as Old as the Creation.[6]
Christian deism is influenced by Christianity, as well as both main forms of deism: classical and modern. In 1698 English writer Matthew Tindal (1653–1733) published a pamphlet "The Liberty of the Press" as a "Christian" deist.[citation needed][dubious – discuss] He believed that the state should control the Church in matters of public communication.[7][relevant? – discuss]
It adopts the ethics and non-mystical teachings of Jesus, while denying that Jesus was a deity. Scholars of the founding fathers of the United States "have tended to place the founders' religion into one of three categories—non-Christian deism, Christian deism, and orthodox Christianity."[8] John Locke and John Tillotson, especially, inspired Christian deism, through their respective writings.[9] Possibly the most famed person to hold this position was Thomas Jefferson, who praised "nature's God" in the "Declaration of Independence" (1776) and edited the "Jefferson Bible"—a Bible with all reference to revelations and other miraculous interventions from a deity cut out.
In an 1803 letter to Joseph Priestley, Jefferson states that he conceived the idea of writing his view of the "Christian system" in a conversation with Dr. Benjamin Rush during 1798–99. He proposes beginning with a review of the morals of the ancient philosophers, moving on to the "deism and ethics of the Jews", and concluding with the "principles of a pure deism" taught by Jesus, "omit[ting] the question of his divinity, and even his inspiration."[10]
Christian deists see no paradox in adopting the values and ideals espoused by Jesus without believing he was God. Without providing examples or citations, one author maintains, "A number of influential 17th- and 18th-century thinkers claimed for themselves the title of 'Christian deist' because they accepted both the Christian religion based on revelation and a deistic religion based on natural reason. This deistic religion was consistent with Christianity but independent of any revealed authority. Christian deists often accepted revelation because it could be made to accord with natural or rational religion."[11]
Contents [hide]
1 Overview 1.1 Deism
1.2 History
1.3 Christian foundation
2 Different schools of thought 2.1 Jesus as the Son of God
2.2 Jesus as a moral teacher
3 Diverging from Christianity and deism
4 See also
5 References
6 External links
Overview[edit]
Deism[edit]
Deism is a humanist theological position (though encompassing a wide variety of view-points) concerning God's relationship with the natural world which emerged during the scientific revolution of 17th-century Europe and came to exert a powerful influence during the 18th-century enlightenment.
Deists reject atheism,[12] and there were a number of different types of deists in the 17th and 18th century.
Deism holds that God does not intervene with the functioning of the natural world in any way, allowing it to run according to the laws of nature that he configured when he created all things. Because God does not control or interfere with his self-sustaining Creation, its component systems work in concert to achieve the balanced natural processes that make up the physical world. As such, Human beings are "free agents in a free world." A "free agent" is someone who has authority and ability to choose his/her actions and who may make mistakes. A "free world" is one which ordinarily operates as it is designed to operate and permits the consequential properties of failure and accident to be experienced by its inhabitants. God is thus conceived to be wholly transcendent and never immanent. For deists, human beings can only know God via reason and the observation of nature but not by revelation or supernatural manifestations (such as miracles)—phenomena which deists regard with caution if not skepticism.
History[edit]
Williston Walker, in A History of the Christian Church, wrote: "In its milder form, it emerged as 'rational supernaturalism,' but in its central development it took the form of a full Christian Deism, while its radical wing turned against organized religion as anti-Christian Deism."[9] "English Deism on the whole was a cautious, Christian Deism, largely restricted in influence to the upper classes. But a radical anti-Christian Deism, militant in its attack on organized Christianity, though with few supporters, accompanied it."[13]
An early Christian deist wrote:
For God, according to these Philosophers, makes and governs a natural World that is capable of governing itself, and that might have made itself as well, had they not pass'd a needless and insignificant Compliment upon, the Creator. But I hope they will mend their Scheme, and compound this Matter for their own Honour, and not pretend to fay, that God has made a necessary World, or a self-existent System of Creatures. Yet this is the philosophical Scheme of Atheism, which its Patrons would fain call Deism, and in which the Christian Jews or Jewish Christians assist them, by joining inadvertently in the fame Cry. But if this be not a fine Scheme of Philosophy, let Christian Deism stand for an odd Sort of Religion, and let the Christian Jews be for ever orthodox, and be allow'd as the only religious Men in the World. It is certain, that if God governs moral Agents at all, he must; govern them by Hope and Fear, or by such a wise and suitable Application of Rewards and Punishments, as the different Circumstances of Persons, and the Ends of Government require. And these Rewards and Punishments must be such as are not the natural, necessary Consequences of the Actions themselves, themselves, since every one must see that this would be no Government at all, and that the Case, in this Respect, must be the very same whether we suppose any rectoral Justice, or any Presence or Operation of God in the World or not. And yet this which is really no Government at all, is all the general Providence which some seem willing to allow. But since those Gentlemen are all deep Philosophers, and above the gross Ignorance of the common Herd, I would here only ask them, What are the Laws of Nature ? What is the Law of Gravity, the Law of communicating Motion from one Body to another by Impulse, and the Law of the Vis -Inertia of Bodies ? Are these natural, essential and inherent Properties of the Bodies themselves, or are they the regular Effects of some universal, extrinsick Cause acting incessantly upon the whole material System, by such and such general Laws and Conditions of Agency?[14]
Another wrote:
This may give the Reader some Notion of this Writer's Candour and Sincerity, and what we are to think of his pretended Regard for Christianity, which in Effect amounts to this: That the Christianity revealed in the Writings of the New Testament is Jewish Christianity; that is, Christianity corrupted and adulterated with Judaism, which according to him is the worst Religion in the World. But the true and genuine Christianity is Christian Deism, to be learned not from the Writings of the New Testament, but from the Volume of Nature, from every Man's own Breast, from the Heavens, the Earth, and especially the Brute Creatures,the genuine uncorrupted Instructors in our Author's Christianity. So that the "Gentlemen that assume to themselves the Title of Deists, seem resolved that for the future they only shall be called the true Christians too. Those that look upon the New Testament to be divinely inspired, and receive it as the Rule of their Faith, and take their Religion from thence, must be called Christian Jews, who only put a strange Mixture of inconsistent Religions upon the World for Christianity : whereas these Christian Deists teach it in its Purity, and in order to propagate pure uncorrupted Christianity they do their utmost to discard.the Writings of the New Testament, that Is, the Writings that give us aft Account of the Doctrines taught by Christ and his Apostles, But since these Gentlemen will not allow; us the honourable Title of Christians, it is but fair that they should leave us that of Free-Thinkers, to which I really think the Advocates for the Gospel Revelation have a much juster Pretension than they.[15]
Christian foundation[edit]
In conjunction with deistic perspectives, Christian deism incorporates Christian tenets. Christian deists believe that Jesus Christ was a deist. Jesus taught that there are two basic laws of God governing humankind. The first law is that life comes from God and we are to use it as God intends, as illustrated in Jesus' parable of the talents. The second law is that God intends for human beings to live by love for each other, as illustrated in Jesus' parable of the good Samaritan.
Jesus summarized two basic "commandments" or laws of God as "love for God and love for neighbor." These two commandments through Christian deism were known to Jesus from the Hebrew scriptures but Jesus expanded the definition of "neighbor" to include everyone concerned in the natural world. "Love for God" means having appreciation for God as the creator of the world and the source of human life. "Love for neighbor" means having appreciation for the value of every human life. These are not laws or "truths" that Jesus received through some supernatural "revelation" according to Christian deism. In his "parable of the sower," Jesus taught that the "word of God" is known naturally because it is sown "in the heart" of everyone. For instance, the apostle Paul, who was a Jew, recognized that God's laws are known naturally by everyone. Paul wrote, "When Gentiles (non-Jews) who do not have the (Mosaic) law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts" (Romans 2:14-15). Christian deism is therefore based on appreciation for all creation and on appreciation for every human life.
In his teachings, Jesus used examples from the natural world and from human nature to explain basic truths about life. In his parables, Jesus spoke of mustard seeds, wheat, weeds, fishing nets, pearls, vineyards, fig trees, salt, candlelight and sheep to illustrate his points. Jesus also used illustrations from human nature to teach basic concepts such as repentance, forgiveness, justice, and love.
Jesus called for people to follow God's laws, or commandments, so the "kingdom of God" could come "on earth as it is in heaven." As Jesus preached the "gospel", or good news, that the "kingdom of God is at hand," Christians deists believe the Romans viewed Jesus as a Jewish revolutionary seeking to liberate the Jews from Roman rule. Jesus refused to stop preaching his "gospel" even though he knew that he was risking crucifixion, the usual Roman penalty for revolutionaries. Jesus called for his followers to take this same risk, "If a man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake and the gospel's will save it" (Mark 8:34-35).
After his crucifixion, Jesus' cross became a symbol of commitment to establishing the "kingdom of God" on earth. Christian deists are committed to following God's natural laws, as summarized in the two "commandments" to love God and love our neighbor.
Different schools of thought[edit]
The broad spectrum of thought available within the idea of a Christian deism encompasses models of classical deism and pandeism with simple reverence for the message of tolerance claimed as espoused by the human Jesus, to belief in Jesus as a sort of naturally occurring divine figure, a mystical product of the rational processes of a rational universe. An example of the broadness attributed to Christian deism is found in this criticism of the position:
Christian Deist, i.e., a man who alleges that the Christian religion is nothing else than pure natural religion. The Deist, whom he introduces speaking, speaks with great presumption, as the ignorant are accustomed to do: that he neither possessed any acquaintance with the ancient languages nor with history, which he betrays in the very beginning, awakens no good anticipations in favour of Morgan, who appears in the person of the Deist. Morgan alleges with great boldness, that his religion of reason alone is divine, that the Christian is a mere invention and device of man, and through all ages since its introduction, has been regarded as such by a small but oppressed party: that the character of Judaism, which is not only human, but altogether devilish, cleaves still to the followers of a blind faith': that the apostle Paul was the chief of the freethinkers who wished to have no connexion with Judaism, and alone preached Christianity in its purity, whilst the other apostles were merely the chiefs of a political party who in the spirit of Judaism had attached themselves to it.
....
The freer Paulinian party, according to Morgan's view, had been from the first always persecuted and oppressed by the others; and although the Jewish Christians had afterwards fallen asunder and separated into various hostile sects, the same intolerant Jewish spirit still, in a greater or a less degree, animated them all, and they would not consent to relinquish the service of sacrifices; this spirit has given birth to a religion of priests among all those sects, which is immeasurably removed from the true religion. In addition, Morgan will not at all admit that his opinions approach in any respect to atheism, or that his object is to defend any thing similar to it; he alone, as he alleges, is a teacher of the true moral religion. It will not therefore be a matter of surprise, that a division of his book treats of the public forms of divine worship, and especially upon prayer. On the other hand, his Christian Deist will have nothing to do with sacrifices or satisfaction,—nothing with the vicarious death of Christ,—nothing with sacrifices and ceremonies,—with grace or election, which does not depend upon the merit of the person elected.[16]
Christian deists do not worship Jesus as God. However, there are differing views concerning the exact nature of Jesus, as well as differing levels of hewing to traditional, orthodox deistic belief on this issue. There are two main theological positions.
Jesus as the Son of God[edit]
Of the Christian deists who look upon Jesus as the Son of God, (but not God himself), the Christian aspect of their faith is drawn from three main aspects of prior Christian thought.[17]
They take a modified view of Pelagius, that there is no need for divine aid in performing good works and that the only "grace" necessary is the declaration of the law. They also hold a mild version of the Moral influence theory of atonement philosophy. They combine these two philosophies with certain aspects of classical Unitarian theology. Indeed, mainstream deistic thought contributed to the rise of Unitarianism itself, with people in the 19th century increasingly self-identifying as Unitarians rather than as deists.[18]
Jesus as a moral teacher[edit]
Christian deists who do not believe in Jesus as the son of God strongly reject any theories of atonement.
Different theories receive different levels of rejection, the strongest rejection being reserved for the theory of penal substitution, that claims that Jesus had to die as a sacrifice to pay the "death penalty" for humankind and save them from the "wrath" of God. And they do not view God as a whimsical tyrant who sends plagues and pestilence to punish people on earth and who plans to torture people in "hell" in the future. Christian deists reject these ideas as products of human hatred and a failure to recognize God's natural laws of love for others.
Christian deists consider themselves to be disciples, or students, of Jesus because Jesus taught the natural laws of God. But Christian deists believe that Jesus was only human.[19] Jesus had to struggle with his own times of disappointment, sorrow, anger, prejudice, impatience, and despair, just as other human beings struggle with these experiences. Jesus never claimed to be perfect but he was committed to following God's natural laws of love.
Diverging from Christianity and deism[edit]
Christian deism can differ from both mainstream deism and orthodox Christianity. This can occasionally be on the same subject but most often, Christian deism finds itself in agreement with one on a given theological topic, only to disagree on the next theological topic.
Christian deism is opposed to the doctrine of predestination in which everything that happens is thought to be "the will of God." John Calvin was a proponent of the theory of predestination in which God allegedly determines everything that happens, whether good or bad. Christian deists believe that it is never "God's will" for anyone to be sick or injured. In that bad things occur as a result of prior interactions that resulted in a specified outcome. These bad things may be caused by interfering with naturalistic processes that result in negative consequences to carbon-based life, or by human interaction on the surface of the Earth that leads to degrees of inhospitable conditions for others. Christians deists believe God gifted the human intellect to heal many illnesses, but God does not directly intervene to heal people on demand by some "supernatural" occurrence. Humans are believed to already have the endowed capacity to create synergies and contribute in some way toward the development of fairer societies on Earth, whether it be through scientific understanding or spiritual enlightenment. However, Christian deists also strongly oppose the mainstream deistic notion that sacred texts like the Bible contain no revealed truths.[20][21]
See also[edit]
Jesuism
Theistic rationalism
Cultural Christian
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Michael Corbett and Julia Mitchell Corbett, Politics and religion in the United States (1999) p. 68
2.Jump up ^ Morgan, Thomas (1738). The moral philosopher: In a dialogue between Philalethes a Christian deist, and Theophanes a Christian Jew.
3.Jump up ^ "Googlebooks.com search for "Christian Deism" before 1800.". In most cases it was used to name a group that the author opposed.
4.Jump up ^ "GoogleBooks search for "christian deists" before 1730".
5.Jump up ^ Waterland, Daniel (1722). Christianity vindicated against infidelity. p. 63.
6.Jump up ^ Tindal, Matthew (1730). Christianity as Old as the Creation. pp. 368 ff.
7.Jump up ^ Anthony C. Thiselton, Hermeneutics: An Introduction (2009) p 137
8.Jump up ^ The faiths of the founding fathers, by David Lynn Holmes, p. 163 (2006)
9.^ Jump up to: a b A history of the Christian church, by Williston Walker, 579 (1985)
10.Jump up ^ Excerpts from the Correspondence of Thomas Jefferson Retrieved 12 Jul 2011
11.Jump up ^ Jesus Christ in History and Scripture, Edgar V. McKnight, p. 96 (1999)
12.Jump up ^ Justo L. González (1984). The Reformation to the present day. HarperCollins. pp. 190–. ISBN 9780060633165. Retrieved 14 Aug 2010.
13.Jump up ^ A history of the Christian church, by Williston Walker, 584 (1985)
14.Jump up ^ The moral philosopher: in a dialogue between Philalethes, a Christian deist and Theophanes a Christian Jew. By Thomas Morgan, 189-190 (1737).
15.Jump up ^ The divine authority of the Old and New Testament asserted, by John Leland, p viii-ix (1739)
16.Jump up ^ History of the Eighteenth Century and of the Nineteenth, by F.C. Schlosser, p. 47 (1843)
17.Jump up ^ "Christian Deism". Enlightenment Deism. Retrieved 2013-08-25.
18.Jump up ^ Mossner, Ernest Campbell (1967). "Deism". The Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Vol. 2. Collier-MacMillan. pp. 326–336
19.Jump up ^ [1][dead link]
20.Jump up ^ "the christian deist café". Christian-deist.blogspot.com. Retrieved 2013-08-25.
21.Jump up ^ "Beliefs". Christiandeism.com. Retrieved 2013-08-25.
External links[edit]
ChristianDeism.com
ChristianDeistFellowship.com
Christian-Deist.Blogspot.com
Spiritual Deism From The Source
Categories: Deism
Theism
Monotheism
Monotheistic religions
Nontrinitarianism
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Edit links
This page was last modified on 16 May 2015, at 18:24.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_deism
Christian deism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
See also: Theistic rationalism
John Locke is often credited for his influence on Christian deism
Christian deism, in the philosophy of religion, is a standpoint that branches from Christianity. It refers to a deist who believes in the moral teachings—but not divinity—of Jesus. Corbett and Corbett (1999) cite John Adams and Thomas Jefferson as exemplars.[1] The earliest-found usage of the term Christian deism in print in English is in 1738 in a book by Thomas Morgan,[2] appearing about ten times by 1800.[3] The term Christian deist is found as early as 1722,[4][5] in Christianity vindicated against infidelity by Daniel Waterland (he calls it a misuse of language), and adopted later by Matthew Tindal in his 1730 work, Christianity as Old as the Creation.[6]
Christian deism is influenced by Christianity, as well as both main forms of deism: classical and modern. In 1698 English writer Matthew Tindal (1653–1733) published a pamphlet "The Liberty of the Press" as a "Christian" deist.[citation needed][dubious – discuss] He believed that the state should control the Church in matters of public communication.[7][relevant? – discuss]
It adopts the ethics and non-mystical teachings of Jesus, while denying that Jesus was a deity. Scholars of the founding fathers of the United States "have tended to place the founders' religion into one of three categories—non-Christian deism, Christian deism, and orthodox Christianity."[8] John Locke and John Tillotson, especially, inspired Christian deism, through their respective writings.[9] Possibly the most famed person to hold this position was Thomas Jefferson, who praised "nature's God" in the "Declaration of Independence" (1776) and edited the "Jefferson Bible"—a Bible with all reference to revelations and other miraculous interventions from a deity cut out.
In an 1803 letter to Joseph Priestley, Jefferson states that he conceived the idea of writing his view of the "Christian system" in a conversation with Dr. Benjamin Rush during 1798–99. He proposes beginning with a review of the morals of the ancient philosophers, moving on to the "deism and ethics of the Jews", and concluding with the "principles of a pure deism" taught by Jesus, "omit[ting] the question of his divinity, and even his inspiration."[10]
Christian deists see no paradox in adopting the values and ideals espoused by Jesus without believing he was God. Without providing examples or citations, one author maintains, "A number of influential 17th- and 18th-century thinkers claimed for themselves the title of 'Christian deist' because they accepted both the Christian religion based on revelation and a deistic religion based on natural reason. This deistic religion was consistent with Christianity but independent of any revealed authority. Christian deists often accepted revelation because it could be made to accord with natural or rational religion."[11]
Contents [hide]
1 Overview 1.1 Deism
1.2 History
1.3 Christian foundation
2 Different schools of thought 2.1 Jesus as the Son of God
2.2 Jesus as a moral teacher
3 Diverging from Christianity and deism
4 See also
5 References
6 External links
Overview[edit]
Deism[edit]
Deism is a humanist theological position (though encompassing a wide variety of view-points) concerning God's relationship with the natural world which emerged during the scientific revolution of 17th-century Europe and came to exert a powerful influence during the 18th-century enlightenment.
Deists reject atheism,[12] and there were a number of different types of deists in the 17th and 18th century.
Deism holds that God does not intervene with the functioning of the natural world in any way, allowing it to run according to the laws of nature that he configured when he created all things. Because God does not control or interfere with his self-sustaining Creation, its component systems work in concert to achieve the balanced natural processes that make up the physical world. As such, Human beings are "free agents in a free world." A "free agent" is someone who has authority and ability to choose his/her actions and who may make mistakes. A "free world" is one which ordinarily operates as it is designed to operate and permits the consequential properties of failure and accident to be experienced by its inhabitants. God is thus conceived to be wholly transcendent and never immanent. For deists, human beings can only know God via reason and the observation of nature but not by revelation or supernatural manifestations (such as miracles)—phenomena which deists regard with caution if not skepticism.
History[edit]
Williston Walker, in A History of the Christian Church, wrote: "In its milder form, it emerged as 'rational supernaturalism,' but in its central development it took the form of a full Christian Deism, while its radical wing turned against organized religion as anti-Christian Deism."[9] "English Deism on the whole was a cautious, Christian Deism, largely restricted in influence to the upper classes. But a radical anti-Christian Deism, militant in its attack on organized Christianity, though with few supporters, accompanied it."[13]
An early Christian deist wrote:
For God, according to these Philosophers, makes and governs a natural World that is capable of governing itself, and that might have made itself as well, had they not pass'd a needless and insignificant Compliment upon, the Creator. But I hope they will mend their Scheme, and compound this Matter for their own Honour, and not pretend to fay, that God has made a necessary World, or a self-existent System of Creatures. Yet this is the philosophical Scheme of Atheism, which its Patrons would fain call Deism, and in which the Christian Jews or Jewish Christians assist them, by joining inadvertently in the fame Cry. But if this be not a fine Scheme of Philosophy, let Christian Deism stand for an odd Sort of Religion, and let the Christian Jews be for ever orthodox, and be allow'd as the only religious Men in the World. It is certain, that if God governs moral Agents at all, he must; govern them by Hope and Fear, or by such a wise and suitable Application of Rewards and Punishments, as the different Circumstances of Persons, and the Ends of Government require. And these Rewards and Punishments must be such as are not the natural, necessary Consequences of the Actions themselves, themselves, since every one must see that this would be no Government at all, and that the Case, in this Respect, must be the very same whether we suppose any rectoral Justice, or any Presence or Operation of God in the World or not. And yet this which is really no Government at all, is all the general Providence which some seem willing to allow. But since those Gentlemen are all deep Philosophers, and above the gross Ignorance of the common Herd, I would here only ask them, What are the Laws of Nature ? What is the Law of Gravity, the Law of communicating Motion from one Body to another by Impulse, and the Law of the Vis -Inertia of Bodies ? Are these natural, essential and inherent Properties of the Bodies themselves, or are they the regular Effects of some universal, extrinsick Cause acting incessantly upon the whole material System, by such and such general Laws and Conditions of Agency?[14]
Another wrote:
This may give the Reader some Notion of this Writer's Candour and Sincerity, and what we are to think of his pretended Regard for Christianity, which in Effect amounts to this: That the Christianity revealed in the Writings of the New Testament is Jewish Christianity; that is, Christianity corrupted and adulterated with Judaism, which according to him is the worst Religion in the World. But the true and genuine Christianity is Christian Deism, to be learned not from the Writings of the New Testament, but from the Volume of Nature, from every Man's own Breast, from the Heavens, the Earth, and especially the Brute Creatures,the genuine uncorrupted Instructors in our Author's Christianity. So that the "Gentlemen that assume to themselves the Title of Deists, seem resolved that for the future they only shall be called the true Christians too. Those that look upon the New Testament to be divinely inspired, and receive it as the Rule of their Faith, and take their Religion from thence, must be called Christian Jews, who only put a strange Mixture of inconsistent Religions upon the World for Christianity : whereas these Christian Deists teach it in its Purity, and in order to propagate pure uncorrupted Christianity they do their utmost to discard.the Writings of the New Testament, that Is, the Writings that give us aft Account of the Doctrines taught by Christ and his Apostles, But since these Gentlemen will not allow; us the honourable Title of Christians, it is but fair that they should leave us that of Free-Thinkers, to which I really think the Advocates for the Gospel Revelation have a much juster Pretension than they.[15]
Christian foundation[edit]
In conjunction with deistic perspectives, Christian deism incorporates Christian tenets. Christian deists believe that Jesus Christ was a deist. Jesus taught that there are two basic laws of God governing humankind. The first law is that life comes from God and we are to use it as God intends, as illustrated in Jesus' parable of the talents. The second law is that God intends for human beings to live by love for each other, as illustrated in Jesus' parable of the good Samaritan.
Jesus summarized two basic "commandments" or laws of God as "love for God and love for neighbor." These two commandments through Christian deism were known to Jesus from the Hebrew scriptures but Jesus expanded the definition of "neighbor" to include everyone concerned in the natural world. "Love for God" means having appreciation for God as the creator of the world and the source of human life. "Love for neighbor" means having appreciation for the value of every human life. These are not laws or "truths" that Jesus received through some supernatural "revelation" according to Christian deism. In his "parable of the sower," Jesus taught that the "word of God" is known naturally because it is sown "in the heart" of everyone. For instance, the apostle Paul, who was a Jew, recognized that God's laws are known naturally by everyone. Paul wrote, "When Gentiles (non-Jews) who do not have the (Mosaic) law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts" (Romans 2:14-15). Christian deism is therefore based on appreciation for all creation and on appreciation for every human life.
In his teachings, Jesus used examples from the natural world and from human nature to explain basic truths about life. In his parables, Jesus spoke of mustard seeds, wheat, weeds, fishing nets, pearls, vineyards, fig trees, salt, candlelight and sheep to illustrate his points. Jesus also used illustrations from human nature to teach basic concepts such as repentance, forgiveness, justice, and love.
Jesus called for people to follow God's laws, or commandments, so the "kingdom of God" could come "on earth as it is in heaven." As Jesus preached the "gospel", or good news, that the "kingdom of God is at hand," Christians deists believe the Romans viewed Jesus as a Jewish revolutionary seeking to liberate the Jews from Roman rule. Jesus refused to stop preaching his "gospel" even though he knew that he was risking crucifixion, the usual Roman penalty for revolutionaries. Jesus called for his followers to take this same risk, "If a man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake and the gospel's will save it" (Mark 8:34-35).
After his crucifixion, Jesus' cross became a symbol of commitment to establishing the "kingdom of God" on earth. Christian deists are committed to following God's natural laws, as summarized in the two "commandments" to love God and love our neighbor.
Different schools of thought[edit]
The broad spectrum of thought available within the idea of a Christian deism encompasses models of classical deism and pandeism with simple reverence for the message of tolerance claimed as espoused by the human Jesus, to belief in Jesus as a sort of naturally occurring divine figure, a mystical product of the rational processes of a rational universe. An example of the broadness attributed to Christian deism is found in this criticism of the position:
Christian Deist, i.e., a man who alleges that the Christian religion is nothing else than pure natural religion. The Deist, whom he introduces speaking, speaks with great presumption, as the ignorant are accustomed to do: that he neither possessed any acquaintance with the ancient languages nor with history, which he betrays in the very beginning, awakens no good anticipations in favour of Morgan, who appears in the person of the Deist. Morgan alleges with great boldness, that his religion of reason alone is divine, that the Christian is a mere invention and device of man, and through all ages since its introduction, has been regarded as such by a small but oppressed party: that the character of Judaism, which is not only human, but altogether devilish, cleaves still to the followers of a blind faith': that the apostle Paul was the chief of the freethinkers who wished to have no connexion with Judaism, and alone preached Christianity in its purity, whilst the other apostles were merely the chiefs of a political party who in the spirit of Judaism had attached themselves to it.
....
The freer Paulinian party, according to Morgan's view, had been from the first always persecuted and oppressed by the others; and although the Jewish Christians had afterwards fallen asunder and separated into various hostile sects, the same intolerant Jewish spirit still, in a greater or a less degree, animated them all, and they would not consent to relinquish the service of sacrifices; this spirit has given birth to a religion of priests among all those sects, which is immeasurably removed from the true religion. In addition, Morgan will not at all admit that his opinions approach in any respect to atheism, or that his object is to defend any thing similar to it; he alone, as he alleges, is a teacher of the true moral religion. It will not therefore be a matter of surprise, that a division of his book treats of the public forms of divine worship, and especially upon prayer. On the other hand, his Christian Deist will have nothing to do with sacrifices or satisfaction,—nothing with the vicarious death of Christ,—nothing with sacrifices and ceremonies,—with grace or election, which does not depend upon the merit of the person elected.[16]
Christian deists do not worship Jesus as God. However, there are differing views concerning the exact nature of Jesus, as well as differing levels of hewing to traditional, orthodox deistic belief on this issue. There are two main theological positions.
Jesus as the Son of God[edit]
Of the Christian deists who look upon Jesus as the Son of God, (but not God himself), the Christian aspect of their faith is drawn from three main aspects of prior Christian thought.[17]
They take a modified view of Pelagius, that there is no need for divine aid in performing good works and that the only "grace" necessary is the declaration of the law. They also hold a mild version of the Moral influence theory of atonement philosophy. They combine these two philosophies with certain aspects of classical Unitarian theology. Indeed, mainstream deistic thought contributed to the rise of Unitarianism itself, with people in the 19th century increasingly self-identifying as Unitarians rather than as deists.[18]
Jesus as a moral teacher[edit]
Christian deists who do not believe in Jesus as the son of God strongly reject any theories of atonement.
Different theories receive different levels of rejection, the strongest rejection being reserved for the theory of penal substitution, that claims that Jesus had to die as a sacrifice to pay the "death penalty" for humankind and save them from the "wrath" of God. And they do not view God as a whimsical tyrant who sends plagues and pestilence to punish people on earth and who plans to torture people in "hell" in the future. Christian deists reject these ideas as products of human hatred and a failure to recognize God's natural laws of love for others.
Christian deists consider themselves to be disciples, or students, of Jesus because Jesus taught the natural laws of God. But Christian deists believe that Jesus was only human.[19] Jesus had to struggle with his own times of disappointment, sorrow, anger, prejudice, impatience, and despair, just as other human beings struggle with these experiences. Jesus never claimed to be perfect but he was committed to following God's natural laws of love.
Diverging from Christianity and deism[edit]
Christian deism can differ from both mainstream deism and orthodox Christianity. This can occasionally be on the same subject but most often, Christian deism finds itself in agreement with one on a given theological topic, only to disagree on the next theological topic.
Christian deism is opposed to the doctrine of predestination in which everything that happens is thought to be "the will of God." John Calvin was a proponent of the theory of predestination in which God allegedly determines everything that happens, whether good or bad. Christian deists believe that it is never "God's will" for anyone to be sick or injured. In that bad things occur as a result of prior interactions that resulted in a specified outcome. These bad things may be caused by interfering with naturalistic processes that result in negative consequences to carbon-based life, or by human interaction on the surface of the Earth that leads to degrees of inhospitable conditions for others. Christians deists believe God gifted the human intellect to heal many illnesses, but God does not directly intervene to heal people on demand by some "supernatural" occurrence. Humans are believed to already have the endowed capacity to create synergies and contribute in some way toward the development of fairer societies on Earth, whether it be through scientific understanding or spiritual enlightenment. However, Christian deists also strongly oppose the mainstream deistic notion that sacred texts like the Bible contain no revealed truths.[20][21]
See also[edit]
Jesuism
Theistic rationalism
Cultural Christian
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Michael Corbett and Julia Mitchell Corbett, Politics and religion in the United States (1999) p. 68
2.Jump up ^ Morgan, Thomas (1738). The moral philosopher: In a dialogue between Philalethes a Christian deist, and Theophanes a Christian Jew.
3.Jump up ^ "Googlebooks.com search for "Christian Deism" before 1800.". In most cases it was used to name a group that the author opposed.
4.Jump up ^ "GoogleBooks search for "christian deists" before 1730".
5.Jump up ^ Waterland, Daniel (1722). Christianity vindicated against infidelity. p. 63.
6.Jump up ^ Tindal, Matthew (1730). Christianity as Old as the Creation. pp. 368 ff.
7.Jump up ^ Anthony C. Thiselton, Hermeneutics: An Introduction (2009) p 137
8.Jump up ^ The faiths of the founding fathers, by David Lynn Holmes, p. 163 (2006)
9.^ Jump up to: a b A history of the Christian church, by Williston Walker, 579 (1985)
10.Jump up ^ Excerpts from the Correspondence of Thomas Jefferson Retrieved 12 Jul 2011
11.Jump up ^ Jesus Christ in History and Scripture, Edgar V. McKnight, p. 96 (1999)
12.Jump up ^ Justo L. González (1984). The Reformation to the present day. HarperCollins. pp. 190–. ISBN 9780060633165. Retrieved 14 Aug 2010.
13.Jump up ^ A history of the Christian church, by Williston Walker, 584 (1985)
14.Jump up ^ The moral philosopher: in a dialogue between Philalethes, a Christian deist and Theophanes a Christian Jew. By Thomas Morgan, 189-190 (1737).
15.Jump up ^ The divine authority of the Old and New Testament asserted, by John Leland, p viii-ix (1739)
16.Jump up ^ History of the Eighteenth Century and of the Nineteenth, by F.C. Schlosser, p. 47 (1843)
17.Jump up ^ "Christian Deism". Enlightenment Deism. Retrieved 2013-08-25.
18.Jump up ^ Mossner, Ernest Campbell (1967). "Deism". The Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Vol. 2. Collier-MacMillan. pp. 326–336
19.Jump up ^ [1][dead link]
20.Jump up ^ "the christian deist café". Christian-deist.blogspot.com. Retrieved 2013-08-25.
21.Jump up ^ "Beliefs". Christiandeism.com. Retrieved 2013-08-25.
External links[edit]
ChristianDeism.com
ChristianDeistFellowship.com
Christian-Deist.Blogspot.com
Spiritual Deism From The Source
Categories: Deism
Theism
Monotheism
Monotheistic religions
Nontrinitarianism
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Edit links
This page was last modified on 16 May 2015, at 18:24.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_deism
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment