隐藏的上帝?卡尔-巴特和科希勒关于无主之神的论述

IF 0.1
Bradley S. Cameron
{"title":"隐藏的上帝?卡尔-巴特和科希勒关于无主之神的论述","authors":"Bradley S. Cameron","doi":"10.5325/jtheointe.17.2.0166","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Biblical scholars of the Old Testament have long upheld that YHWH is a “hidden God.” In fact, the hiddenness of God finds robust expression in the book of Ecclesiastes, where the concept seems to frame the very idea of God. Yet Karl Barth famously opposed Luther’s Deus absconditus, whose existence suggested a God “behind the back” of Jesus. If Barth is right that YHWH is no Deus absconditus, what then of Qohelet’s claim that divine hiddenness is an essential theological affirmation? The goal of this article is to examine how Barth’s discomfort with the Deus absconditus can be reconciled with the fact that divine hiddenness seems to frame Qoheleth’s theological perspective. On the side of systematics, we must determine what Barth says about hiddenness and the Deus absconditus: why, how, and to what degree he challenges the notion. As I shall argue, Barth’s complex theology of revelation exhibits a tension, both affirming a certain notion of God’s “hiddenness” and denying the Deus absconditus. On the biblical side, we must determine the nature and content of Qohelet’s God-talk. I will argue that many descriptions of the God-talk of Ecclesiastes are exaggerated and insensitive to Qohelet’s larger theological perspective. In the end, a more nuanced reading of both Barth and Qoheleth can bring these giants into conversation with one another and perhaps even clarify what is left ambiguous in Ecclesiastes’s theological assertions.","PeriodicalId":53190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Theological Interpretation","volume":" 15","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Hidden God? Karl Barth and Qoheleth on the Deus Absconditus\",\"authors\":\"Bradley S. Cameron\",\"doi\":\"10.5325/jtheointe.17.2.0166\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Biblical scholars of the Old Testament have long upheld that YHWH is a “hidden God.” In fact, the hiddenness of God finds robust expression in the book of Ecclesiastes, where the concept seems to frame the very idea of God. Yet Karl Barth famously opposed Luther’s Deus absconditus, whose existence suggested a God “behind the back” of Jesus. If Barth is right that YHWH is no Deus absconditus, what then of Qohelet’s claim that divine hiddenness is an essential theological affirmation? The goal of this article is to examine how Barth’s discomfort with the Deus absconditus can be reconciled with the fact that divine hiddenness seems to frame Qoheleth’s theological perspective. On the side of systematics, we must determine what Barth says about hiddenness and the Deus absconditus: why, how, and to what degree he challenges the notion. As I shall argue, Barth’s complex theology of revelation exhibits a tension, both affirming a certain notion of God’s “hiddenness” and denying the Deus absconditus. On the biblical side, we must determine the nature and content of Qohelet’s God-talk. I will argue that many descriptions of the God-talk of Ecclesiastes are exaggerated and insensitive to Qohelet’s larger theological perspective. In the end, a more nuanced reading of both Barth and Qoheleth can bring these giants into conversation with one another and perhaps even clarify what is left ambiguous in Ecclesiastes’s theological assertions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53190,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Theological Interpretation\",\"volume\":\" 15\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Theological Interpretation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5325/jtheointe.17.2.0166\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Theological Interpretation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5325/jtheointe.17.2.0166","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

旧约圣经学者长期以来坚持认为耶和华是一位“隐藏的神”。事实上,上帝的隐秘性在《传道书》中得到了有力的表达,这个概念似乎构建了上帝的概念。然而,卡尔·巴特(Karl Barth)著名地反对路德的《逃神论》(Deus abconditus),后者的存在暗示了耶稣“背后”的上帝。如果巴特是对的,耶和华不是无所不在的上帝,那么,圣神的隐蔽性是一种基本的神学肯定的说法又如何呢?这篇文章的目的是检验巴特对上帝的隐蔽性的不适如何与神圣的隐蔽性似乎构成了Qoheleth的神学观点这一事实相协调。在系统学方面,我们必须确定巴特对隐藏和逃避的上帝说了什么:他为什么,如何,以及在多大程度上挑战了这个概念。正如我将要论证的那样,巴特复杂的启示神学表现出一种张力,既肯定了上帝“隐藏”的某种概念,又否认了上帝的潜逃性。从圣经的角度来看,我们必须确定小天使的神论的性质和内容。我要论证的是,传道书中许多关于上帝话语的描述都被夸大了,而且对小赫莱更大的神学观点不敏感。最后,对巴思和《先知录》进行更细致的解读,可以让这两位巨人彼此对话,甚至可以澄清《传道书》神学主张中模棱两可的地方。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Hidden God? Karl Barth and Qoheleth on the Deus Absconditus
Biblical scholars of the Old Testament have long upheld that YHWH is a “hidden God.” In fact, the hiddenness of God finds robust expression in the book of Ecclesiastes, where the concept seems to frame the very idea of God. Yet Karl Barth famously opposed Luther’s Deus absconditus, whose existence suggested a God “behind the back” of Jesus. If Barth is right that YHWH is no Deus absconditus, what then of Qohelet’s claim that divine hiddenness is an essential theological affirmation? The goal of this article is to examine how Barth’s discomfort with the Deus absconditus can be reconciled with the fact that divine hiddenness seems to frame Qoheleth’s theological perspective. On the side of systematics, we must determine what Barth says about hiddenness and the Deus absconditus: why, how, and to what degree he challenges the notion. As I shall argue, Barth’s complex theology of revelation exhibits a tension, both affirming a certain notion of God’s “hiddenness” and denying the Deus absconditus. On the biblical side, we must determine the nature and content of Qohelet’s God-talk. I will argue that many descriptions of the God-talk of Ecclesiastes are exaggerated and insensitive to Qohelet’s larger theological perspective. In the end, a more nuanced reading of both Barth and Qoheleth can bring these giants into conversation with one another and perhaps even clarify what is left ambiguous in Ecclesiastes’s theological assertions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信