It is my persuasion that the thinker who has most truly understood the revolutionary and
dialectical meaning of faith is Hegel, and that we must ever return to Hegel for a theoretical understanding of the meaning of a movement of dialectical negation.
Not exact matches
Quite possibly Barth realized that a
dialectical method must negate all human expressions
of the
meaning of faith — including the creedal and dogmatic statements
of the historic Church — while paradoxically affirming the deepest expressions
of «subjectivity» or Existenz.
So likewise Kierkegaard's
dialectical understanding
of faith establishes the subjective truth
of faith as a consequence
of the negation
of objectivity, and the passion and inwardness
of faith is established only by virtue
of the absurdity
of its objective
meaning or ground.
Only such a
dialectical negation can save the
meaning of faith from the darkness brought on by the collapse
of Christendom.
William A. Beardslee speaks from a different perspective than that
of Theodore Runyon, but both raise the important question
of the
meaning of the dialectic
of faith, just as both pose the question
of whether my position is
dialectical or dualistic.
In the Orient, a fully
dialectical form
of faith, such as Madhyamika Buddhism, has inevitably dissolved all positive
meaning, with the result that it has left behind the world
of symbols, myths and dogmas.
One
of the genuine alternatives in our time to the «
dialectical» or «Continental» theology as a constructive advance upon liberalism is the mode
of theological thinking which seeks to reinterpret the force and
meaning of the Christian
faith within the new intellectual framework that is being provided by modern metaphysics.