This essay reviews Jürgen Moltmann's volume, "The Trinity and the
Kingdom: The Doctrine of God" (1980). The author raises the question: To what degree is Moltmann's Trinitarian theology to be judged as a helpful contribution to the Jewish-Christian dialogue given the fact that Jews would disagree fundamentally with the description of God's unity as a relationship between three fully divine beings?
Table of Contents
I. Extended Preliminary Remarks: The Methodological Vagueness of a(n) (Anti-)Systematical Contribution to Trinitarian Theology
II. Moltmann and the “God of the Philosophers:” A Farewell to Theism
III. Critical Incidental Remarks: Social Trinitarism as Victim of the Dangerous, “Whimsical” Analogy
IV. The Jewish-Christian Dialogue as Hermeneutical Exercise
V. Embracing the Old Testament through Philosophical Mediation: What Moltmann learned from Heschel
VI. Vestigia trinitatis in the Old Testament?
VII. Moltmann on Barth: Friend or Opponent?
VIII. Moltmann’s Ideological Reservations: Has Monotheism a Tendency towards Monarchism?
IX. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Themes
The academic article critically examines Jürgen Moltmann’s trinitarian theology, particularly as presented in "The Trinity and the Kingdom," focusing on its implications for Jewish-Christian dialogue and its internal methodological consistency.
- The evaluation of Moltmann’s non-systematic approach and methodological rigor.
- The critique of "Social Trinitarism" and the use of analogical reasoning.
- The assessment of Moltmann’s efforts to facilitate Jewish-Christian dialogue.
- The investigation of the relationship between God’s self-differentiation, the Old Testament, and the Doctrine of the Trinity.
- The analysis of Moltmann’s theological positioning relative to Karl Barth and the potential for monotheism to lean toward monarchism.
Excerpt from the Book
Moltmann and the “God of the Philosophers:” A Farewell to Theism
Moltmann’s revision of the classical theistic notion of God that transfers attributiva absoluta like simplicitas, infinitas, immensitas, immutabilitas, and incomprehensibilitas to God can be characterized as a “return to Israel.” Moltmann’s God has no similarity with the apathetic “God of the Philosophers” (Blaise Pascal), the idol of occidental Western metaphysics like the Aristotelian prōton kinoun or the Thomistic “summum bonum,” but rather with the “God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,” who runs in his or her “anthropomorphic” passion after Israel like a deceived husband runs after his adulterous wife (Hosea 1f). For Moltmann, the notion of God represents neither a chiffre for a “supreme substance” (10-12) nor for the modern “absolute subject” (13-16). As Moltmann already had displayed in “The Crucified God” (1972), the cross reveals God as being sym-pathic rather than a-pathic, because the happenings on the cross are happenings in God’s inner being. In other words, Moltmann develops a distinctively “pathetic theology.” The notion of God’s pathos is used by him in an equivocal way. It means the experienced, moreover actively endured suffering of God as well as his or her passion.
Summary of Chapters
I. Extended Preliminary Remarks: The Methodological Vagueness of a(n) (Anti-)Systematical Contribution to Trinitarian Theology: This chapter introduces the methodological critique of Moltmann’s work, highlighting the tension between his anti-systematic claims and the actual structure of his theology.
II. Moltmann and the “God of the Philosophers:” A Farewell to Theism: The chapter explores Moltmann’s shift away from classical, apathetic concepts of God toward a “pathetic” theology centered on the suffering experienced by God on the cross.
III. Critical Incidental Remarks: Social Trinitarism as Victim of the Dangerous, “Whimsical” Analogy: This section examines the implications of Moltmann’s "social trinitarism" and questions the validity and limits of using human social structures as analogies for the Trinity.
IV. The Jewish-Christian Dialogue as Hermeneutical Exercise: This part analyzes how Moltmann’s theology attempts to integrate biblical Jewish faith into Christian discourse without abandoning distinctively Christian confessions.
V. Embracing the Old Testament through Philosophical Mediation: What Moltmann learned from Heschel: The chapter details Moltmann’s reliance on Jewish thinkers like Abraham Heschel to interpret divine pathos as a bridge between Old Testament revelation and trinitarian doctrine.
VI. Vestigia trinitatis in the Old Testament?: The author critiques Moltmann for failing to sufficiently ground his doctrine of the Trinity in the Old Testament’s own understanding of God’s self-differentiation.
VII. Moltmann on Barth: Friend or Opponent?: This chapter investigates the critical dialogue between Moltmann and Karl Barth, noting inconsistencies in Moltmann’s critique of Barth’s approach to God’s self-differentiation.
VIII. Moltmann’s Ideological Reservations: Has Monotheism a Tendency towards Monarchism?: This section discusses Moltmann’s controversial thesis that monotheism supports political monarchism and contrasts this view with the Jewish understanding of the oneness of God.
IX. Conclusion: The final section summarizes the fundamental divergence points between the Christian and Jewish perspectives, questioning whether Moltmann’s Christological focus risks obscuring the distinction between God and creation.
Keywords
Jürgen Moltmann, Trinitarian Theology, Jewish-Christian Dialogue, Social Trinitarism, Divine Pathos, Abraham Heschel, Karl Barth, Monotheism, Monarchism, Theologia Crucis, Systematische Theologie, Christian Doctrine, Hermeneutics, Perichoresis, Trinity
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this article?
The article provides a rigorous critical review of Jürgen Moltmann’s trinitarian theology, specifically evaluating its methodological foundations and its effectiveness in the context of Jewish-Christian dialogue.
What is the central research question addressed in the text?
The author asks to what extent Moltmann’s trinitarian theology is a helpful contribution to Jewish-Christian dialogue and whether his methodological approach successfully balances non-systematic intent with the requirements of scientific theology.
What are the main thematic fields covered?
Key themes include the critique of "social trinitarism," the role of divine pathos, the reception of Jewish thought (specifically Heschel), and the relationship between trinitarian doctrine and political monarchism.
Which methodology does the author apply?
The author employs a critical, analytical, and comparative theological method, measuring Moltmann’s arguments against his own stated criteria and broader traditional theological standards.
What does the main body of the work examine?
The main body systematically analyzes Moltmann’s interpretation of the Trinity, his use of analogies, his engagement with the Old Testament, and his critique of other theological perspectives like those of Barth.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
The primary keywords include Trinitarian Theology, Jewish-Christian Dialogue, Social Trinitarism, Divine Pathos, and the critical assessment of theological methodology.
How does the author interpret Moltmann’s view on "social trinitarism"?
The author views it as problematic, arguing that the analogical figure used by Moltmann to explain the unity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is vulnerable to "whimsical" and arbitrary application.
What is the core of the author's conclusion regarding the Jewish-Christian dialogue?
The author concludes that while Moltmann intends to be ecumenically open, his specific Christological focus risks creating insurmountable points of divergence by potentially idolizing human-divine analogies.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Marco Hofheinz (Autor:in), 1998, The Passionate God, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/141408
