The Hidden God

Marius Timmann Mjaaland

Description

In this phenomenological reading of Luther, Marius Timmann Mjaaland shows that theological discourse is never philosophically neutral and always politically loaded. Raising questions concerning the conditions of modern philosophy, religion, and political ideas, Marius Timmann Mjaaland follows a dark thread of thought back to its origin in Martin Luther. Thorough analyses of the genealogy of secularization, the political role of the apocalypse, the topology of the self, and the destruction of metaphysics demonstrate the continuous relevance of this highly subtle thinker.rabbi

Preface
Acknowledgements
Introduction
1. Topology of Texts and the Destruction of Metaphysics
2. Sola Scriptura
3. The Hidden God
4. Modernity in the Making
5. From Revelation to Revolution
Notes
Bibliography
Index

Sujets

• Philosophie
• Philosophie de la religion
• Religious
• PHILOSOPHY
• Philosophie et théologie
• Philosophy of religion

Informations

• Publié par: Indiana University Press
• Date de parution: 15 novembre 2015
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9780253018205
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 1 Mo

Extrait

THE HIDDEN GOD
I NDIANA S ERIES IN THE P HILOSOPHY OF R ELIGION Merold Westphal, editor
THE HIDDEN GOD
LUTHER, PHILOSOPHY, AND POLITICAL THEOLOGY
MARIUS TIMMANN MJAALAND
This book is a publication of
Indiana University Press Office of Scholarly Publishing Herman B Wells Library 350 1320 East 10th Street Bloomington, Indiana 47405 USA
iupress.indiana.edu
2016 by Marius Timmann Mjaaland All rights reserved
No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. The Association of American University Presses Resolution on Permissions constitutes the only exception to this prohibition.
The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American National Standard for Information Sciences-Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1992.
Manufactured in the United States of America
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Mjaaland, Marius Timmann.
The hidden God : Luther, philosophy, and political theology / Marius Timmann Mjaaland.
pages cm. - (Indiana series in the philosophy of religion)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-0-253-01816-8 (cloth : alk. paper) - ISBN 978-0-253-01820-5 (e-book) 1. Luther, Martin, 1483-1546. 2. Philosophy and religion. I. Title.
BR333.3.M55 2015
230 .41-dc23
2015035568
1 2 3 4 5 21 20 19 18 17 16
CONTENTS
Preface
Acknowledgments
Introduction
PART I The Topology of Texts and Destruction of Metaphysics
1. History, Hermeneutics, and Political Theology
2. Philosophy: The Grammar of Destruction
3. Topology
PART II Sola Scriptura
4. The Quest for Immorality
5. The Quest for Destruction
6. The Quest for Clarity
7. The Quest for Sovereignty
8. The Quest for Subjectivity
PART III The Hidden God
9. Deus Absconditus
PART IV Modernity in the Making
10. Topology of the Self in Luther
11. Kant versus Luther on Self-Consciousness
12. Spacing the Hidden God: The Temporal/Spatial Divide
PART V From Revelation to Revolution
13. The Power of Interpretation: Controversies on the Book of Daniel
14. Political Theology of the German Revolutions
15. The Hidden God of Revolution and Apocalypse
Notes
Bibliography
Index
PREFACE
Luther s distinction between the hidden and the revealed God is one of the most puzzling and controversial topics of his thought. For centuries it was mostly neglected within theology, whereas it played a crucial role in the development of modern philosophy. Pascal and Kant insisted on this distinction, whereas Hegel rejected it in favor of a total revelation of the Spirit. Even political imagination was affected, where it played a significant but secluded role, from apocalyptic visions to the hard currency of oikonomia and sovereignty. The modest ambition of the present volume is to examine the source of this development, namely, to trace an original difference between absolute hiddenness and the light of scripture, of reason, and of revelation in order to reconsider it as a topic of controversies in the twenty-first century.
Theologians in early modernity were reluctant to discuss the notion of the hidden God due to its threatening and monstrous gestalt in religious imagination. When Luther introduced the distinction between the hidden and the revealed God, however, the point was to avoid such speculations concerning the hidden God, and also to venture a destruction of Aristotelian metaphysics and thus raise a critical discussion on the rationality of philosophical and theological discourse-and the crucial difference between them. Hence, the history of perception has witnessed an ironic twist of fate: The theological discussions on the topic have ended with a rather confessional response, either pro or contra the hidden God, whereby the status confessionis in the early twenty-first century goes in favor of the latter, namely, an exclusion of the notion from theological discourse.
The history of modern philosophy, conversely, demonstrates a continued discussion on the distinction between hiddenness and revelation as a primary topos of thought, which concerns the ultimate conditions for philosophical discourse, linguistically, metaphysically, and epistemologically. From a somewhat different approach, namely, from the question of sovereignty, revolution, and political decisions in the most fateful historical states of exception, the hidden God has come to play a controversial role even for political philosophy and theology. Both trajectories will be submitted to further inquiry in a planned second volume on the hidden God in modernity, also including controversies in philosophy and political theology.
This volume goes back to the textual origins of this modern topos in the writings of Martin Luther. Already here we find that the traces of the hidden God proceed beyond the limits of theology, raising questions of metaphysics, of political philosophy, of phenomenology in a critical sense, questioning the entire tradition from medieval philosophy. This critical approach gradually becomes a virtue in philosophical reflection in modernity. Kant s transcendental critique of metaphysics is perhaps the most crucial example of modern philosophy, and he dedicates several chapters to the question of God s hiddenness in The Critique of Pure Reason . Pascal demonstrates the political interpretation of the hidden God in his Pens es , and Hegel is deeply concerned with this topos, insofar as he does a major effort at including theological patterns like the death of God within a philosophical system, admittedly emphasizing the revelation of divine truth rather than the opposite. The most crucial but also controversial example is Nietzsche, though, who proclaims the death of God to be a prophetic message of modernity and its ends , thereby adopting a topological approach to philosophy and its ultimate points of reference, and a genealogical approach to morality. My suspicion is that this death of God belongs to the genealogy of an ancient topos called deus absconditus , but that is a topic by far transgressing the limits of this preface. What Nietzsche has understood about the limitations of his own approach and his prophetic assertions is that knowledge and philosophy can never be good in itself. Its apparent goodness is always deceptive, and the problem of drawing distinctions between truth and delusion remains a continuous task. This is an insight he shares with Martin Luther, who admits that he continuously distrusts his own reason and therefore has taken recourse to paradox as a way of seeking truth.
When scientists claim the discovery of a god delusion, as Richard Dawkins does in a popular publication known by this audacious name, we may calmly expect that they have not even begun considering their own delusions. If someone made them aware of this disproportion, I would not be surprised if the response took the form of resentment and disturbance. In this respect the present volume will hopefully be disturbing, by making people aware of such disproportions in the commerce with illusions.
In some respects the notion of the hidden God seems to produce such images of the divine that generate questions and accusations. Rudolf Otto s definition of the Holy (numinous) in religion as mysterium tremendum et fascinans -a terrifying but fascinating mystery-is based on Luther s notion of the hidden God. We could think of endless fairy tales, myths, and horror films where the hidden God is presented in the most fantastic images. The conscientious theologian Gerhard Ebeling even warns us against the terror of the hidden God and gives us the friendly advice to flee from God to God. Yet I am afraid I will have to disappoint every reader who had hoped for a juicy horror story. A core task of this book is to question such myths and monstrosities of imagination, which tend to overrule more-rational inquiries on the conditions of thought. My concern is the opposite, namely, to analyze these notions carefully but critically in order to disillusion some illusions and make readers aware of disproportions. And if someone should claim, as Eberhard J ngel does in a famous article, that this hidden God should be no concern of ours, I will once more make the reader aware of this difference: Although a disturbing topos, it remains at the heart of the controversy.
In the writings of Martin Luther, this original difference is in one respect theological, but then again pre -theological, preceding every doctrine and logos of theology. It forces us to take into account the concealment of the divine, and the conditions for speaking or not speaking about God. The difference is at work whenever we offer critique or defense of religion, whenever we look for revelation, experience, or interpretation, whenever we discuss theism or atheism, the dead or the living God.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
If it takes ten months to write a book like this one, it takes ten years to think through it, and one may still wonder if all the key questions have been raised with the scrutiny they require. For such questioning, the discussions with colleagues, friends, and opponents are invaluable. Since this topic invites controversy, and has done so since time immemorial, let me begin with a word of thanks to my critics, enemies, and opponents: Your contribution to clarification and scrutiny has been most important, so keep up the good work!
For support and funding, I send warm thanks to the Research Council of Norway, to the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, and to the five universities where I have worked and lived over the last ten years: The University of Oslo, the University of T bingen, the University of Hamburg, the University of Rostock, and the University of Chicago. My deepest gratitude and respect go to colleagues and fr