{"title":"安德斯·尼格伦的《爱与爱》,爱任纽和基督教的本质","authors":"J. Kaufman","doi":"10.23865/noasp.133.ch02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In Anders Nygren’s seminal study of the Christian concept of love, Eros och Agape, the second century bishop and theologian Irenaeus of Lyons is given an important role in the development of the “Christian idea of love”. In this chapter, I will critically discuss certain aspects of Nygren’s and his colleague Gustaf Aulen’s treatment of Irenaeus. Nygren and Aulen presuppose that one can delineate “pure” concepts or ideas or motifs in history (such as “Christian love”), they maintain that it makes sense to speak of the “essence” of Christianity as a given, and they find their normative basis in the genius of Luther, against which they can evaluate the genuineness of any given conception of Christianity. This is of course both provincial and anachronistic. A critical reading of Nygren’s and Aulen’s understanding of Irenaeus and the concept of Christian love raises important questions concerning objectivity, normativity and givenness. I argue in this chapter that there are no stable given “ideas” or “motifs” that can be “identified” or “discovered” or “described” objectively. I believe it is possible, however, to give accounts that will be recognizable and plausible to others who are familiar with the fragmentary sources upon which our accounts are based. At best, we can together construct plausible understandings of a concept such as Christian love, or of a thinker such as Irenaeus, or of something as broad and multifaceted as Christianity – without purporting to have found the true “essence” of the thing we are studying.","PeriodicalId":425519,"journal":{"name":"Love – Ancient Perspectives","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Anders Nygren’s Agape and Eros, Irenaeus, and the Essence of Christianity\",\"authors\":\"J. Kaufman\",\"doi\":\"10.23865/noasp.133.ch02\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In Anders Nygren’s seminal study of the Christian concept of love, Eros och Agape, the second century bishop and theologian Irenaeus of Lyons is given an important role in the development of the “Christian idea of love”. In this chapter, I will critically discuss certain aspects of Nygren’s and his colleague Gustaf Aulen’s treatment of Irenaeus. Nygren and Aulen presuppose that one can delineate “pure” concepts or ideas or motifs in history (such as “Christian love”), they maintain that it makes sense to speak of the “essence” of Christianity as a given, and they find their normative basis in the genius of Luther, against which they can evaluate the genuineness of any given conception of Christianity. This is of course both provincial and anachronistic. A critical reading of Nygren’s and Aulen’s understanding of Irenaeus and the concept of Christian love raises important questions concerning objectivity, normativity and givenness. I argue in this chapter that there are no stable given “ideas” or “motifs” that can be “identified” or “discovered” or “described” objectively. I believe it is possible, however, to give accounts that will be recognizable and plausible to others who are familiar with the fragmentary sources upon which our accounts are based. At best, we can together construct plausible understandings of a concept such as Christian love, or of a thinker such as Irenaeus, or of something as broad and multifaceted as Christianity – without purporting to have found the true “essence” of the thing we are studying.\",\"PeriodicalId\":425519,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Love – Ancient Perspectives\",\"volume\":\"43 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Love – Ancient Perspectives\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.23865/noasp.133.ch02\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Love – Ancient Perspectives","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23865/noasp.133.ch02","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Anders Nygren’s Agape and Eros, Irenaeus, and the Essence of Christianity
In Anders Nygren’s seminal study of the Christian concept of love, Eros och Agape, the second century bishop and theologian Irenaeus of Lyons is given an important role in the development of the “Christian idea of love”. In this chapter, I will critically discuss certain aspects of Nygren’s and his colleague Gustaf Aulen’s treatment of Irenaeus. Nygren and Aulen presuppose that one can delineate “pure” concepts or ideas or motifs in history (such as “Christian love”), they maintain that it makes sense to speak of the “essence” of Christianity as a given, and they find their normative basis in the genius of Luther, against which they can evaluate the genuineness of any given conception of Christianity. This is of course both provincial and anachronistic. A critical reading of Nygren’s and Aulen’s understanding of Irenaeus and the concept of Christian love raises important questions concerning objectivity, normativity and givenness. I argue in this chapter that there are no stable given “ideas” or “motifs” that can be “identified” or “discovered” or “described” objectively. I believe it is possible, however, to give accounts that will be recognizable and plausible to others who are familiar with the fragmentary sources upon which our accounts are based. At best, we can together construct plausible understandings of a concept such as Christian love, or of a thinker such as Irenaeus, or of something as broad and multifaceted as Christianity – without purporting to have found the true “essence” of the thing we are studying.