"Jesus...did not come to the people as their political and religious
master to put them in their place, subjugated and quietly resigned.
He did not force his own rule upon the people. Neither did he force
his own form upon a formless mass. He heard the call of the people
and called them out from their position as objects of the manipulation
and rule by others to be subjects of the new history of God with the
human race. The "folk movement" which Jesus enkindled is the movement
in which the people itself becomes the subject of its own new history
in the liberation movement of God. (107)"
Moltmann, The Passion For Life: A Messianic Lifestyle, translated by
M. Meeks, 1978.
November 4, 2008
In Honor of Election Day
Church, please don't forget who you are and where (read: who) your hope comes from.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
Joe,
I read that Moltmann believes that God's promise to act in the future is more important than the fact that he has acted in the past.
Is this true? Does he really believe that? Does he believe that the cross is not as important as what will happen in the future? Surely not.
Also isnt this the guy who was influenced by the philosophy of Enrst Bloch, who was a MARXIST? I have also read that he teaches that the Godhead is really three separate beings forming three separate gods (TRITHEISM). Orthodox Christianity as you know would call Tritheism heresy.
Are these articles correct about him?
Those statement are all partially correct, like all lies are partially correct.
Moltmann says the cross is the very center of what it means for the triune God to be God, that it has and will always mark the nature of God. What Moltmann does say is that reality is eschatologically determined (which can actually be found in St. Thomas Aquinas as well - see final cause), that the God who has future as essence, comes to creation time and again, and and opens it to the possiblities of the kingdom. That is affirming both present and future.
Moltmann was influence by Ernst Bloch's "Principle of Hope." Bloch is a Marxist (only the first letter should be capitalized). Moltmann is not a Marxist. He does not subscribe the the modified Hegelian view of history, nor the materialist interpretaiont of reality that is inbeded within Marxism. Moltmann is a democratic socilatist. Does that mean he does not have something to teach us? Augustine was a NeoPlatonist, Thomas was an Aristotelean, Luther was a nomialist (combined with Augustinianism), the evangelical founder Henry was a pure Enlightenment thinker. Each of their thought categories are shaped by extra-biblical foundations, should we reject them? Or should we listen prayerfully and potentially learn something?
The charge of tritheism is false as well. He offers a social construction of the Trinity, which is fully realized eschatologically. Every trinitarian construction defaults either to monarchism (heresy), traces of which can be found in Augustine, or tritheism (traces of which can be miscontrued into the work of Gregory of Nyssa the definitive voice on trinitarian theology). This is not to say that either of these Fathers is a heretic or that their theology is heretical. It IS to say, however, that every theology of the Trinity leans one way or another. Moltmann would deny, and any one who engages him with Christian honesty and charity should deny, that he is a tritheist. Moltmann is simply dealing with the oneness of God from the threeness, as per the patter of scripture.
The articles are pattenly false.
well anonymous #2, thank you for answering anonymous #1 very well.
To Anonymous #1, you should read Moltmann, not what others say about him.
To Anonymous #2, how's Houston...:)
Post a Comment