“从为数不多的杰苏·克里斯托那里”。从安德烈亚斯·奥西安德的异端中可以学到什么

Pub Date : 2022-11-01 DOI:10.1515/nzsth-2022-0017
W. Sparn
{"title":"“从为数不多的杰苏·克里斯托那里”。从安德烈亚斯·奥西安德的异端中可以学到什么","authors":"W. Sparn","doi":"10.1515/nzsth-2022-0017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The first part of this contribution is devoted to my recollection of Christoph Schwöbel; both of us were pupils of Carl Heinz Ratschow, albeit at different times and in different roles. However, we both have been following a twofold counsel of our teacher, first not to restrict theology to value judgments but to strive for an ontology of Christian belief and second to work with a “Trinitarian definition of Christology”. Part two recounts the turmoil around Andreas Osiander in a turbulent time of a crisis of authority around 1550. He was in the end judged to be heretic and was excluded from “true” Lutheranism in the Formula of Concord 1577. Indeed, his doctrine of justification, influenced by humanistic Neoplatonism and even the Kabbala was contrary to the predominant position of the Wittenberg school. However, the crucial point was Osiander’s constellation of Soteriology, Christology and Trinitarian concept of God on a strictly exegetic basis. Part three offers a sketch of the interrelation of Osiander’s soteriological model of the believer’s ascension to God, his Christology of a mediator, and his concept of the divine Logos. In his time, Osiander in a way fulfilled Ratschow’s twofold counsel, in opposition to Christological functionalism and theological positivism. Even today, in view of the ecumenical debate on the doctrine of justification, his thought might give useful hints for revising the aforementioned tasks in fundamental theology.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"„Von dem einigen mitler Jhesu Christo“. Was man von Andreas Osianders Häresie noch lernen könnte\",\"authors\":\"W. Sparn\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/nzsth-2022-0017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The first part of this contribution is devoted to my recollection of Christoph Schwöbel; both of us were pupils of Carl Heinz Ratschow, albeit at different times and in different roles. However, we both have been following a twofold counsel of our teacher, first not to restrict theology to value judgments but to strive for an ontology of Christian belief and second to work with a “Trinitarian definition of Christology”. Part two recounts the turmoil around Andreas Osiander in a turbulent time of a crisis of authority around 1550. He was in the end judged to be heretic and was excluded from “true” Lutheranism in the Formula of Concord 1577. Indeed, his doctrine of justification, influenced by humanistic Neoplatonism and even the Kabbala was contrary to the predominant position of the Wittenberg school. However, the crucial point was Osiander’s constellation of Soteriology, Christology and Trinitarian concept of God on a strictly exegetic basis. Part three offers a sketch of the interrelation of Osiander’s soteriological model of the believer’s ascension to God, his Christology of a mediator, and his concept of the divine Logos. In his time, Osiander in a way fulfilled Ratschow’s twofold counsel, in opposition to Christological functionalism and theological positivism. Even today, in view of the ecumenical debate on the doctrine of justification, his thought might give useful hints for revising the aforementioned tasks in fundamental theology.\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/nzsth-2022-0017\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/nzsth-2022-0017","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

这篇文章的第一部分是我对Christoph Schwöbel的回忆;我们俩都是卡尔·海因茨·拉舍尔的学生,尽管时间不同,角色也不同。然而,我们都遵循了老师的双重建议,首先,不要把神学限制在价值判断上,而是要为基督教信仰的本体论而努力,其次,要用“三位一体的基督论定义”来工作。第二部分讲述了1550年左右,在权力危机的动荡时期,安德烈亚斯·奥西安德周围的动荡。他最终被判定为异端,并在1577年的《康科德公式》中被排除在“真正的”路德教之外。事实上,他的正义学说受到人本主义新柏拉图主义甚至卡巴拉的影响,与维滕贝格学派的主导地位相反。然而,关键的一点是奥西安德的救赎论,基督论和三位一体的上帝概念在严格的训诂基础上的星座。第三部分概述了奥西安德关于信徒升天到上帝的救赎论模型,他的中保基督论,以及他的神圣逻各斯概念之间的相互关系。在他的时代,奥西安德在某种程度上实现了拉肖夫的双重忠告,反对基督功能主义和神学实证主义。即使在今天,鉴于基督教对称义教义的争论,他的思想也可能为修改基础神学中的上述任务提供有用的提示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享
查看原文
„Von dem einigen mitler Jhesu Christo“. Was man von Andreas Osianders Häresie noch lernen könnte
Abstract The first part of this contribution is devoted to my recollection of Christoph Schwöbel; both of us were pupils of Carl Heinz Ratschow, albeit at different times and in different roles. However, we both have been following a twofold counsel of our teacher, first not to restrict theology to value judgments but to strive for an ontology of Christian belief and second to work with a “Trinitarian definition of Christology”. Part two recounts the turmoil around Andreas Osiander in a turbulent time of a crisis of authority around 1550. He was in the end judged to be heretic and was excluded from “true” Lutheranism in the Formula of Concord 1577. Indeed, his doctrine of justification, influenced by humanistic Neoplatonism and even the Kabbala was contrary to the predominant position of the Wittenberg school. However, the crucial point was Osiander’s constellation of Soteriology, Christology and Trinitarian concept of God on a strictly exegetic basis. Part three offers a sketch of the interrelation of Osiander’s soteriological model of the believer’s ascension to God, his Christology of a mediator, and his concept of the divine Logos. In his time, Osiander in a way fulfilled Ratschow’s twofold counsel, in opposition to Christological functionalism and theological positivism. Even today, in view of the ecumenical debate on the doctrine of justification, his thought might give useful hints for revising the aforementioned tasks in fundamental theology.
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
×
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