In the “Attunement” of Soren Kierkegaard’s Fear and Trembling, the author produces four beautiful variations on God’s temptation of Abraham in Genesis 22. In each, Abraham fails at his test in some way; even though in each he offers his son, he misses the full movements of philosophy and faith that the true Abraham completed. Each is closed by a brief image of a child being weaned, presumably a metaphor of the past story. Characteristically of Kierkegaard’s non-prescriptive style, we are told that these stories are the way in which a certain man has tried to understand Abraham; we are invited, but not forced, into contemplation of these various stories. There exist a wealth of connections between each Abraham narrative and the later text, but the motive or meaning behind this proliferation of Abrahams remains unclear, and the metaphors remain even less so. Examining the source of the stories and our own process of understanding them in terms of the forces of thought and faith, we can see the emergence of Kierkegaard’s self-styled role of poet in the form and purpose of these Attunement narratives.
These stories are given to the reader secondhand, as the labors of a man Kierkegaard knows or imagines. It is important for the reader to know the man’s reasons for producing these alternative possibilities of Abraham’s trial, and what this man seeks to gain from examining each. This man is presented paradoxically as “no thinker, [who] felt no need to go further than faith.” At the same time, he is no perfect example, let alone a knight, of faith. Even though he is not a thinker, he is nonetheless using his worldly, rational powers to produce and analyze these stories. It is the “shudder of thought” that drives his obsession w...
... middle of paper ...
...that he has succeeded as the first example of the hero-loving poet at work in this new order. The best image of this poet Kierkegaard offers is as one who “wanders round in front of everyone’s door with this song and his speech, so that all can admire the hero as he does, be proud of the hero as he is.” In the narratives and metaphors, we have heard Kierkegaard’s song. It is tightly constructed, divided into choruses and refrains, as a song should be. Like the words of a song, it resists being nitpicked to produce false meaning. It is meant to be pocketed and later contemplated at whatever place and time suits its contemplation. It is a call to come outside, but forces nobody to follow. If a listener chooses to join the poet, the song does exactly what it promises to and baffles the listener, who now can admire Abraham just as Kierkegaard does: in bafflement.
To begin with, the dual narratives of the text here present a unique mixture of chronology and perspective. Moreover, noteworthy is also McBride’s usage of the rhetorical strategy of alternate chapters and parallelism. This can be seen when McBride remarkably places related chapters together to juxtapose the life of his mother and that of himself. This allows one to observe the parallelism in the two lives; and perhaps more importantly, understand the significance Ruth’s life has had on McBride. For example, McBride places the chapters “Shul” and “School” next to each other. Here, both Ruth and James are struggling and are trying to fit in but are rejected due to racial and social conflicts. Another example is, “The New Testament” and “The Old Testament.” Both of these chapters revolve around the embarrassment Ruth and James feel for their circumstances. In “The Ne...
To begin with, the dual narratives of the text here present a unique mixture of chronology and perspective. Moreover, noteworthy is also McBride’s usage of the rhetorical strategy of alternate chapters and parallelism. This can be seen when McBride remarkably places related chapters together to juxtapose the life of his mother and that of himself. This allows one to observe the parallelism in the two lives and to understand the significance Rachel's life had on McBride. For example, McBride places the chapter titled “Shul” and “School” next to each other with each giving a view of the problems they faced in school. Here both Ruth and James are struggling and are trying to fit in but are rejected due to racial and social conflicts. Another example is “The New Testament” and “The Old Testament.” Both of these chapters revolve around the embarrassm...
In the first chapter of God Behaving Badly, David Lamb argues that God is unfairly given a bad reputation. He claims these negative perceptions are fueled by pop culture and lead many to believe the lie that the God of the Old Testament is angry, sexist, racist, violent, legalistic, rigid, and distant. These negative perceptions, in turn, affect our faith. Ultimately, Lamb seeks to demonstrate that historical context disproves the presumptuous aforementioned. In addition, he defends his position by citing patterns of descriptions that characterize God throughout the Old Testament. “Our image of God will directly affect how we either pursue or avoid God. If we believe that the God of the Old Testament is really harsh, unfair and cruel, we won’t want anything to do with him” (Lamb 22). Clearly, they way Christians choose to see God will shape their relationship with Him.
How to live one’s life is a question faced by any human being with relatively normal cognitive functioning. Some find beauty in every day life, reveling in something as simple as the gentle shaking of leaves dancing to the whispered song of the wind, or waking up to someone they have decided to spend the rest of their lives with. Others only see the mundane and the tedious, growing bitter and resentful as a relentless existential crisis latches on to the deepest parts of their psyche, casting a grim and ominous shadow over every thought and action. This probing question of how to live is at the forefront of Soren Kierkegaard’s “Either/Or: A Fragment of Life.” The aforementioned views are, indeed, reflected in the fragmented perspectives provided by Kierkegaard’s fictional characters, “A” and “Judge Wilhelm,” who perhaps reflect Kierkegaard’s own divided views. Love and companionship are at the crux of how to live for both A and Wilhelm, despite the glaring contrast between A’s calls for a hedonistic,
In the Flannery O’Connor’s great book, “Wise blood”, Hazel motes, the main character of the literature, is a hero struggling against his prophetic vocation, yet turning out to be a Christian martyr at the end of his long and futile ordeals. The development of the literature centers around the protagonist’s struggle to run away from Jesus, who poses Jesus as “something awful,” and his final return to him. Hazel’s movement throughout the literature, therefore, may be seen as a journey: a modern man’s progress from rebellion against God, to penance, and to return to him through the painful recognition of his sinful and fallen nature. The shrill thesis of the literature is stressed by its circular journey pattern of escape from and return to God.
N.T Wright (2008) stated that “When we read the scriptures as Christians, we read it precisely as people of the new covenant and of the new creation” (p.281). In this statement, the author reveals a paradigm of scriptural interpretation that exists for him as a Christian, theologian, and profession and Bishop. When one surveys the entirety of modern Christendom, one finds a variety of methods and perspectives on biblical interpretation, and indeed on the how one defines the meaning in the parables of Jesus. Capon (2002) and Snodgrass (2008) offer differing perspectives on how one should approach the scriptures and how the true sense of meaning should be extracted. This paper will serve as a brief examination of the methodologies presented by these two authors. Let us begin, with an
Different approaches are required in order to get to the theology of the book. Unreserved evidences from the text itself provide the clear set of evidence that God is in fact behind the scenes preserving and sheltering His people. Several other definite items such as literary structure, writi...
In The Brothers Karamazov Fyodor Dostoevsky said, “…fear is simply the consequence of every lie.” Dostoevsky is stating how people are afraid of what will happen when their lie(s) is/are put out in the open. Fear is a distressing emotion aroused by impending danger, evil, pain, etc., whether the threat is real or imagined. This line suggests that people are afraid of the truth, which inevitably is the consequence of every lie. Even though this quote was written by a 19th century author it can still relate to texts that were made centuries prior. Both Sophocles and Shakespeare’s plays support Dostoevky because both plays deal with the act of lying and its consequences as a major motif.
Because of their Puritanical beliefs, it is no surprise that the major theme that runs throughout Mary Rowlandson and Jonathan Edwards’s writings is religion. This aspect of religion is apparent in not only the constant mentions about God himself, but also in the heavy use of biblical scriptures. In their respective writings, Rowlandson and Edwards utilize scripture, but for different purposes; one uses it to convey that good and bad events happen solely because of God’s will, and the other uses it, in one instance, to illustrate how it brought him closer to God, and, in another instance, to justify his harsh claims about God’s powerful wrath.
In Kierkegaard’s Fear and Trembling, the concept of the Knight of Faith is an exalted one, a unique title awarded to those whose devotion to God goes far beyond what is even comprehensible or expected for the average man, who has an aesthetic or ethical life. We are told by Kierkegaard that this Knight of Faith, when in a situation where resignation appears to be the only solution to a problem, puts his faith in what appears to be the absurd, and believes that the solution that he desires lies in God. This fuels his faith, and makes him better than the aesthetic man, who simply abandons or ignores the problem, or the ethical man, the Knight of Infinite Resignation, who accepts the problem and resigns himself to a life of despair. The Knight of Faith exists as a shining beacon of devotion to the will of God, and, according to Kierkegaard, there exist only two known examples of the Knight of Faith: Abraham, and Mary. These exemplary figures in history put their faith in God, and believed that God would provide a solution to their problems. This unconditional faith in their creator is supposed to be inspirational, and in a sense, make the reader feel incredibly pitiful and resentful of their own wavering faith. In the following paragraphs, I aim to argue that a moment of absolute faithlessness can prove to be just as powerful as a moment of pure faith, and that Mary and Abraham serve as God-given examples of an absolute faith that is inaccessible to all but a few humans who serve very specific purposes in this world. Finally, I will propose a different mode of existence, one in which a man’s free will allows him to find joy in whatever God provides for him.
In the words of Bertrand Russell, “Fear is the main source of superstition, and one of the main sources of cruelty. To conquer fear is the beginning of wisdom” (Russell). Fear causes many problems in our lives. Fear influences many of a person’s actions and decisions. However, people usually regret the decisions or actions they made out of fear. Also, these actions and decisions can cause problems for those people in their future. Fear is a harmful emotion, for it clouds people’s judgement, disables them from taking action, and causes them to make decisions that they will regret later.
The structural and technical features of the story point towards a religious epiphany. The title of the story, as well as its eventual subject, that of cathedrals, points inevitably towards divinity. Upon first approaching the story, without reading the first word of the first paragraph, one is already forced into thinking about a religious image. In addition, four of the story’s eleven pages (that amounts to one third of the tale) surround the subject of cathedrals.
Kierkegaard was a Danish philosopher in the mid 1800s. He is known to be the father of existentialism and was at least 70 years ahead of his time. Kierkegaard set out to attack Kant’s rational ethics and make attacks on the Christianity of our day. He poses the question, how do we understand faith? He states that faith equals the absurd. In “Fear and Trembling”, he uses the story of Abraham and his son Isaac to show an example of faith as the absurd. The story of God asking Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac signifies a break in the theory that ethics and religion go hand in hand. He shows how the ethical and the religious can be completely different. “I by no means conclude that faith is something inferior but rather that it is the highest, also that it is dishonest of philosophy to give something else in its place and to disparage faith” (Fear and Trembling, 12).
How does the individual assure himself that he is justified? In Soren Kierkegaard's Fear and Trembling, Abraham, found in a paradox between two ethical duties, is confronted with this question. He has ethical duties to be faithful to God and also to his son, Isaac. He believes that God demands him to sacrifice Isaac. But, Abraham, firmly adhering to his faith, submitted to what he believed was the will of God. By using his perspective and that of his alternative guise, Johannes de Silentio, Kierkegaard concentrates on the story of Abraham in such a way that his audience must choose between two extremes. Either Abraham is insane or he is justified in saying he will kill Isaac.
Kierkegaard, a highly regarded philosopher of the 19th century, put to us the idea of living life in three different stages. He named these stages the Aesthetical, the Ethical and the Religious. He himself passed through each of the stages in his own lifetime and he adopted them as his own philosophy of human existence. The first two stages are characterized by a distinct set of beliefs and behaviors that are easily identified, whereas the last stage, the religious is characterized by a highly personal, subjective and non-rational ‘’leap of faith’’. The ideal is to progress from the aesthetical to the ethical, finally reaching the religious stage but as Kierkegaard himself realized, it is possible to regress or go back a stage. He said that he felt that he had never really left the first two, these stages were always there. He believed that one can move in and out and through all three stages within a lifetime. For the purpose of this essay I will explain each of the three stages in order to give an understanding of Kierkegaard’s philosophical theory of life. Also I will discuss why Kierkegaard considered the religious stage as the best kind of life for humanity and I will present to you some criticisms against Kierkegaard’s third stage.