Judaism

In his 1968 poetry collection „Fadensonnen“, Paul Celan offers a hermetic blend of existentialism and mysticism, which is unusual in two respects. Firstly, the European philosophy of existence, especially with its proponents Jean-Paul Sartre, Albert Camus and Martin Heidegger, had gone to great lengths to criticize and delegitimize the Abrahametic religions, for the concept of god seemed to be an obstacle to humanity in pursuit of its own humanization. Secondly, in the aftermath of the holocaust, the idea of man wanting (...) to merge with a god that had not prevented this cruelty from happening had lost much of its plausibility. Despite these two objections, Celan's poems address the struggle of togetherness in a world that negates the mere possibility of otherness, trying to salvage the unique identity and dignity of the other. With this in mind, the modus operandi of his poems is that of a butcher: Whatever has previously been alive – before the Shoah – now has to be stripped bare of its layers of individual and collective history, has to become less than body and flesh. In this way, the poems' inherent pain and misery transform the reader into a nobody, for only a nobody has got the prerequisites to encounter other people unbiasedly in their unique wholeness. Within this space of encounter, only the reminiscence of body and sexuality exists, commemorating the other, so that radical corporeality seems to be the prerequisite for togetherness. In this ahistorical sphere there is no room for a god that permitted the holocaust, redefining mysticism as the connection between men instead of one between man and god. Celan's poems act as a catalyst, for they exclude god from the spheres of man, making poetry a memorial site to the dead and the ones living in pain. This way, the poems are trying to save Eros (in the sense of creaturely love) from being mutilated by the crimes of European history while at the same time aiming at rehabilitating mankind in a post-holocaust world. (shrink)

There is no single Jewish philosophical conception of God, and the array of competing conceptions does not lend itself to easy systemization. Nonetheless, it is the aim of this chapter to provide an overview of this unruly theological terrain. It does this by setting out ‘maps’ of the range of positions which Jewish philosophers have taken regarding key aspects of the God-idea. These conceptual maps will cover: (i) how Jewish philosophers have thought of the role and status of conceiving of (...) God in the first place; (ii) what Jewish philosophers have understood to be definitive of God or Divinity; (iii) Jewish philosophical conceptions of God’s oneness; (iv) Jewish philosophical conceptions of God’s transcendence or immanence; (v) Jewish philosophical conceptions of God’s personhood or lack thereof; (vi) Jewish philosophical understandings of why God created (or caused) a world; and (vii) Jewish philosophical understandings of God’s relationship to the Jewish people. Jointly, these seven conceptual maps outline the broad range of vying conceptions of God that have been held by Jewish philosophers over the centuries, while also enabling the reader a bird’s-eye-view of how these multiple conceptions relate to one another. The chapter concludes by touching on what Jewish philosophers have made of this immense diversity of theological conceptions included within the tradition. (shrink)

The impermanence of human affairs is a major theme in Spinoza’s discussions of political histories, and from our present-day perspective it is both intriguing and ironic to see how this very theme has played out in the evolving fate of Spinoza’s association with atheism. While Spinoza’s contemporaries charged him with atheism in order to impugn his philosophy (and sometimes his character), in our times many lay readers and some scholars portray Spinoza as an atheist in order to commemorate his role (...) as a founder of modern secularism. In this paper, I will argue that Spinoza deserves neither vilification nor praise for being an atheist, for the simple reason that he was not one (unless one employs the term ‘atheism’ in a very peculiar sense). I have chosen the current topic as my contribution to a volume focused on the TTP, the Ethics, and their interrelations because it is precisely these two books which brought about the common reactionary accusation of atheism by Spinoza’s contemporaries. Addressing Spinoza’s 1663 book, Descartes’ Principles of Philosophy, Bayle writes: “Spinoza appears as orthodox in that book about the nature of God.” As we shall shortly see, Descartes too was accused of atheism by some of his contemporaries (though not so by Bayle). The latter designates his target quite explicitly: “[Spinoza’s] Tractatus Theologico Politicus, printed in Amsterdam, in the year 1670, is a pernicious and execrable book which contains all the seeds of the Atheism he plainly discovered in his Opera Posthuma.” François Lamy, in his 1696 Le nouvel athéisme renversé, also focused on the Ethics and the TTP in his attack on Spinoza’s atheism. Bayle’s reference to the Opera Posthuma is ostensibly targeting the Ethics at least primarily, if not uniquely. Even the most suspicious and distrustful mind would have to labor hard in order to find atheism in the Hebrew Grammar, or even in the Tractatus Politicus where Spinoza argues that it is not within the power, and hence right, of the commonwealth to induce people to adopt utterly absurd beliefs, such as “that the whole is greater than its part or that God does not exist.” The TTP and the Ethics are the works where Spinoza launches his merciless attack on anthropocentric thinking and anthropomorphic religion. Spinoza’s panentheism (“quicquid est, in Deo est”) constitutes the metaphysical foundation of the Ethics, and it is repeatedly and clearly alluded to in the TTP. Since it is these two elements – (1) Spinoza’s open assertions of panentheism and (2) his critique of andromorphic conceptions of God – which are the historical grounds for the atheism charge, it seems natural that the merit of this charge should be decided primarily by examination of these two foundational works. I will proceed in the following manner. In the first part of the paper, we will make our first acquaintance with the imputation of atheism by Spinoza’s contemporaries and Spinoza’s response to the charge (or lack thereof). In the second part, I discuss three broad strategies, or hermeneutic avenues, that have been pursued to impute atheism to Spinoza. The first of the three was dominant in Spinoza’s time, while the latter two were employed more recently. These strategies are not mutually exclusive and we can find occasionally various combinations of different shades of these three strategies. In this part, I will also raise some preliminary questions about the cogency of the hermeneutics employed by each strategy. In the third and fourth parts of the paper, I will discuss a small selection of key texts from the Ethics and the TTP, respectively, and argue that the atheist readings fail to make sense of these key passages (unless one adopts an extreme hermeneutics of suspicion which could allegedly find any view harbored in any text). Let me stress that this selection of passages is far from comprehensive, and that dozens of other passages can be adduced to establish the very same point. I hope by the end of the fourth part to convince the reader of the deep problems besetting the atheist readings. In the fifth and last part, I show that both panentheism and the critique of anthropomorphic religion and anthropomorphic conceptions of providence were quite common within rabbinic discourse. Thus, I will argue that if we are not in the business of announcing that both Maimonides and the Kabbalists were atheists, we should avoid the same imputation to Spinoza. Underlying my argument in this final part is the claim that at least some perceptions of Spinoza as an atheist are instances of what could be termed conceptual colonialism, i.e. the enforcement of the categories of a hegemonic culture (in this case, Western Christianity ) on minority cultures (in the current case, rabbinic Judaism). To be clear, this attitude need not be motivated by ill intentions or racism. It is always tempting and easy to explain the unfamiliar through the familiar, but conceptual stagnation and insistence on imposing the categories of the familiar on other cultures may quickly lead to deep distortion and blindness, despite one’s best intentions. Unless one is exceedingly careful to avoid the – completely natural – temptation to impose one’s own categories on a foreign culture (and to look for the coin only under the street light), one is likely to end up with distorted conceptions of the relevant alien culture, despite one’s best intentions. (shrink)

In the first part of this paper we will consider the likely extent of Spinoza’s exposure to Kabbalistic literature as he was growing up in Amsterdam. In the second part we will closely study several texts in which Spinoza seems to engage with Kabbalistic doctrines. In the third and final part we will study the role of the two crucial doctrines of emanation and pantheism (or panentheism), in Spinoza’s system and in the Kabbalistic literature.

In this short essay, we sketch a theory of faith that features resilience in the face of challenges to relying on those in whom you have faith. We argue that it handles a variety of both religious and secular faith-data, e.g., the value of faith in relationships of mutual faith and faithfulness, how the Christian and Hebrew scriptures portray pístis and ʾĕmûnāh, and the character of faith as it is often expressed in popular secular venues.

As an atheistic religious tradition, Buddhism conventionally stands in opposition to Christianity, and any bridge between them is considered to be riddled with contradictory beliefs on God the creator, salvific power and the afterlife. But what if a Buddhist could also be a Classical Theist? Showing how the various contradictions are not as fundamental as commonly thought, Tyler Dalton McNabb and Erik Baldwin challenge existing assumptions and argue that Classical Theism is, in fact, compatible with Buddhism. They draw parallels between (...) the metaphysical doctrines of both traditions, synthesize their ethical and soteriological commitments and demonstrate that the Theist can interpret the Buddhist's religious experiences, specifically those of emptiness, as veridical, without denying any core doctrine of Classical Theism. By establishing that a synthesis of the two traditions is plausible, this book provides a bold, fresh perspective on the philosophy of religion and reinvigorates philosophical debates between Buddhism and Christianity. (shrink)

In the Anglophone world the Jesuit philosopher and theologian Erich Przywara (1889‐1972) tends to be known almost exclusively to Balthasar and Barth scholars (as an important mentor to the former and a formidable nemesis of the latter). In recent years, however, interest in Przywara has grown beyond these circles, owing in part to the English translation of his magnum opus, Analogia Entis (2014), and a handful of articles and monographs on his thought. Indeed, it is gradually being recognized that Przywara (...) was an important philosopher and theologian in his own right – of no less stature, and arguably profounder, than the most recognized names in modern theology – even if he did not possess the same oratorical gifts. At the same time, however, a shadow has been cast over this recovery effort since an American church historian named Paul Peterson accused Przywara, along with Balthasar and even Barth, of varying degrees of anti‐Semitism and fascist sympathies – charges that, were they true, would make one reluctant to read him or find out why Edith Stein, Balthasar, Rahner, Josef Pieper et al. thought so highly of him. The point of this article, accordingly, is to set the record straight, at least as far as Przywara’s supposed “anti‐Semitism” is concerned (his view of National Socialism will be treated separately). It is understandable, of course, that Peterson is troubled that theologians could have contributed to the conditions that led to the horrors of the Shoah; and this alone justifies the zeal of his investigations. But the unfortunate way he has conducted them has also come with a cost: in this case, the misrepresentation of the intentions and the unjust impugning of the character of an eminent theologian, from whom, according to Rahner and Balthasar – indeed, according to John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and Pope Francis – the church still has much to learn. But, as regrettable as this may be, Peterson’s investigations have also done a service for modern theology: not only have they occasioned a closer look at Przywara’s cultural and political views, which was overdue; they have also helped to uncover, however inadvertently, a distinctly Pauline theology of Israel, aspects of which may yet prove fruitful. (shrink)

We examine dialectical tensions between “dialogue” and “narrative” as these discourses supplant one another as the fundamental discourse of intelligibility, through juxtaposing two interpretations of Genesis 38 rooted in changing interpretative paradigms. Is dialogue properly understood as a narrative genre, or is narrative the content about which people are in dialogue? Is the divine–human relationship a narrative drama or is it a dialogue between a god and human beings? We work within parameters laid out by the philosophical hermeneutics of Gadamer (...) (primarily representing dialogue) and Ricoeur (primarily representing narrative). On the one hand, a feminist approach can develop Tamar as a courageous hero in impossible circumstances, strategizing to overturn Judah’s patriarchal naïveté. On the other hand, Judah seems to be able to be read as a tragic hero, seeking to save Tamar. These readings challenge one another, where either Tamar’s or Judah’s autonomy is undermined. By putting these interpretations into dialogue, our aim is to show that neither dialogue nor narrative succeeds the other with finality, and that we can achieve a fragile integration of the two (dialogue and narrative) despite their propensity toward polarization. (shrink)

This paper investigates the concept of Heimat in the work of philosopher, writer, and journalist Fritz Mauthner (1849–1923). It points out a conflict between Mauthner’s language philosophy and his political views. In his philosophical work, he argues that language is an insufficient tool for the acquisition of knowledge. When he writes about his heritage and uses notions such as Heimat, Volk, or Vaterland, Mauthner makes claims about the formation of social communities based on a shared language and neglects a critical (...) analysis. It appears as if he ignores the philosophical critique of language when it comes to political concepts. Thus, his political position is usually described without regard to his language philosophy, and Mauthner is conceived as a devoted German nationalist and a typical example of Jewish self-hatred. That reading can be contrasted with parts of his work – especially the late book Muttersprache und Vaterland (1920) – in which he criticizes political concepts from a language-philosophical point of view. I argue that Mauthner, read as a philosopher, cannot be typecast as a naïve nationalist as he is too contradictory. I show that his writings offer both a historical example of German nationalism and a deconstruction of nationalism. (shrink)

What are faith and faithfulness, and how are they related? We consider two views that express very different answers to these questions. On our view, faith and faithfulness are distinct and yet complement each other. Faith is resilient reliance and faithfulness is resilient reliability, both of which involve conative and/or affective elements. In contrast, while Jonathan Kvanvig also holds that faith involves conative and/or affective elements, he identifies faith with a disposition to act in service of an ideal in the (...) face of difficulty. However, this view of faith leads to some puzzling claims about how faith relates to faithfulness. We evaluate several claims suggested by what Kvanvig says, arguing both that his view loses sight of the distinctness of faith and faithfulness and that the inferences he wants to draw from faithfulness or faithful behaviour to faith are unjustified. Instead, we aim to show how the insights he calls to our attention can be better accommodated and explained by a more comprehensive, unified theory of faith and faithfulness and their relations. (shrink)

In contemporary Anglo-American philosophy, there has been substantial debate between religious and secular theorists about what would make life meaningful, with a large majority of the religious philosophers having drawn on Christianity. In this article, in contrast, I draw on Judaism, with the aims of articulating characteristically Jewish approaches to life's meaning, which is a kind of intellectual history, and of providing some support for them relative to familiar Christian and Islamic approaches (salient in the Tanakh, the New Testament, and (...) the Qur’an), which is more philosophical. Sometimes I point out that dominant views in contemporary philosophy favor a Jewish approach to meaning relative to rivals, e.g., insofar as Judaism contends that a merely earthly life can be meaningful. Other times I suggest that Judaism provides reason to doubt dominant views in recent analytic philosophy, e.g., to the extent that the former posits a people, not merely a person, as a bearer of meaning. (shrink)

In this brief essay I reflect upon the character of Jewish spirituality through a meditation on the themes of tradition, love, and loss as they appear in the Broadway musical Fiddler on the Roof.

يصْدُرُ موسى ابن ميمون (Moïse Maïmonide) (1204 – 1138م) في مؤلّفه ''دَلَالةُ الحَائِرين'' عن رؤيةٍ نقديّةٍ؛ إذ همَّ إلى الأنظار المُكْتَسبة والتقليديّة حول التوراة، وقام بمراجعتها، محاولاً بناء معرفة منطقية عقلية لا تنفي النصّ المقدس وإنما تقرأه في ضوء نظرةٍ فلسفيةٍ ذات راهنية. وما دعاهُ إلى مثل ذلك، هو تتبع واقع النصّ المقدّس على عصره، وما آل إليه واقع التّفسير. إنّ قراءة، أبواب الكتاب وحروفه التي قسّمها إلى ثلاثة أقسام حسب ما ثقفت؛ العنصر الأول، وهو يناقش مفهوم الله الذي أشْكَلَ (...) على الفلاسفة وعلى رجال الدين، فما اتّفِقَ حوله قط، خصوصا في ما يتعلق بخصائص الذات وعلاقتها بالصّفات، مفهوم العالم وفيه مؤاخذات ومواقف كثيرة، لا يكاد يحدُّها حصرٌ، حيثُ أدْرَجَ ابن ميمون هذه المسألة بذكاء حادّ وفطنة يقظة، ليدافع عن فكرة حدوث العالم، و في الأخير مفهوم الإنسان. Maimonides, in his book “Guide for The Perplexed”, produces a critical vision. He has attributed to traditional views of the Torah and reviewed them, attempting to build a rational logical knowledge that does not deny the Torah but reads it in the light of a current philosophical view. What he called for, is to follow the reality of the Sacred texts on his time, and the reality of interpretation. Reading, the doors and letters of the book which he divided into three sections according to what I have learned; the first element, is the concept of God, which cause a problem for philosophers and theologians, what has never been agreed upon, especially with regard to the characteristics of the Godself and its relationship to qualities. the second concept is the World; many attitudes listed this question with sharp intelligence and vigilance, discussing the idea of the “Eternity World”, and at last the concept of Man. (shrink)

My essay will take as its point of departure the paragraph from Gershom Scholem’s “Reflections on Jewish Theology,” in which he depicts the modern religious experience as the one of the "void of God" or as "pious atheism". I will first argue that the "void of God" cannot be reduced to atheistic non-belief in the presence of God. Then, I will demonstrate the further development of the Scholemian notion of the ‘pious atheism’ in Derrida, especially in his Lurianic treatment of (...) Angelus Silesius, whose modern mysticism emerges in Derrida’s reading as the ‘almost-atheism’. The interesting feature of this development is that, while for Scholem, the ‘void of God’ is a predominantly negative experience, for Derrida, it becomes an affirmative model of modern – not just Jewish, but more generally, Abrahamic – religiosity which, on the one hand, touches upon atheistic non-belief in the divine presence here and now, yet, on the other, still insists on commemorating the ‘withdrawn God’ through his ‘traces.’ What, therefore, for Scholem, constitutes the ultimate cry of despair, best embodied in Kafka’s work – for Derrida, reveals the more positive face of the modern predicament in which God has absented himself in order to make room for the creaturely reality. And while Scholem envisages redemption as the full restoration of the divine presence – Derrida redefines redemption as the ‘pious’ work of deconstruction to be undertaken in the ‘almost-atheistic’ condition of irreversible separation between God and the world. (shrink)

El CONGRESO DE LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS y el Presidente en 1991 respaldaron un conjunto de siete principios éticos universales, llamados Leyes Noájicas, como la “piedra angular de la sociedad desde los albores de la civilización” y como valores “sobre los cuales se fundó nuestra gran nación”. Asociados al nombre de Noé, con quien este código moral fue completado, practicados por Abraham y reiterados en el Sinaí, estos principios constituyen el código ético fundamental de la humanidad. En un momento de gran (...) deriva moral y social, cuando tanto los individuos como los legisladores buscan una brújula moral objetiva y universal, estas leyes atemporales tienen una relevancia especial y una resonancia unificadora sobre diferentes culturas, sociedades y tradiciones. -/- La primera parte de este libro expone la idea o teoría de las Leyes Noájicas, desde perspectivas espirituales, filosóficas, psicológicas, sociales y políticas. Varios de sus contenidos ya han sido presentados a líderes, incluidos estadistas internacionales (cuyas cartas se incluyen aquí), que han respondido con ánimo a su estudio y difusión. -/- La segunda parte del libro presenta la conducta o práctica concreta de las Leyes Noájicas. Esta tarea precisa procede de una extensa investigación acerca de la Tradición del comentario sobre la Revelación en el Sinaí, de la cual forman parte las Leyes de Noé (que ya anteriormente eran el pacto moral de la humanidad, pero que fueron reexpresadas con autoridad en el Sinaí). La forma en que las Leyes de Noé con sus detalles estructuran la conducta ética de los principales dominios de la existencia humana se establece claramente para el lector general; y con extensas notas a pie de página y referencias para aquellos que buscan profundizar el estudio. -/- El autor, el rabino Dr. Shimon Cowen, fundador y director del Instituto para el Judaísmo y la Civilización en Melbourne, Australia, ha articulado distintos aspectos de su propia producción anterior en la redacción de este libro. Con una formación académica general y un doctorado en Filosofía Social, él sabe cómo comunicar el concepto de ética antigua, eterna y universal a aquellas personas formadas en una cultura secular, en términos de su lenguaje y los conceptos de sus disciplinas. -/- Con titulaciones rabínicas obtenidas en Australia y en Israel, así como un largo período de estudios en Kollel Menachem, Melbourne, del cual se convirtió en su Director de Educación Comunitaria, adquirió las habilidades necesarias para investigar estas leyes de sus fuentes. Fue durante este período que produjo una traducción y un comentario sobre un texto importante, Seder Bircas Hanehenin. La investigación técnica requerida para la segunda parte del presente trabajo se llevó a cabo bajo la revisión de una de las mayores autoridades del mundo en esta área del derecho tradicional. -/- Finalmente, el rabino Cowen ha intentado probar la viabilidad y aceptabilidad de las ideas en su presentación práctica. Se ha basado en el mérito de su difunto padre, un ex gobernador general de Australia, Sir Zelman Cowen OBM, para obtener acceso a legisladores y foros políticos, en los que ha hablado sobre las Leyes Noájicas y su aplicación a la política social. Su libro Politics and Universal Ethics ha sido lanzado en eventos bipartidistas en cinco de las seis legislaturas estatales de Australia. (shrink)

La primera parte de este libro expone la idea o teoría de las Leyes Noájicas, desde perspectivas espirituales, filosóficas, psicológicas, sociales y políticas. Varios de sus contenidos ya han sido presentados a líderes, incluidos estadistas internacionales (cuyas cartas se incluyen aquí), que han respondido con ánimo a su estudio y difusión. La segunda parte del libro presenta la conducta o práctica concreta de las Leyes Noájicas. Esta tarea precisa procede de una extensa investigación acerca de la Tradición del comentario sobre (...) la Revelación en el Sinaí, de la cual forman parte las Leyes de Noé (que ya anteriormente eran el pacto moral de la humanidad, pero que fueron reexpresadas con autoridad en el Sinaí). La forma en que las Leyes de Noé con sus detalles estructuran la conducta ética de los principales dominios de la existencia humana se establece claramente para el lector general; y con extensas notas a pie de página y referencias para aquellos que buscan profundizar el estudio. (shrink)

De evocatie van de gebeurtenissen die plaatsvonden ab origine convergeert, volgens het mythisch-religieuze perspectief, voor de manifestatie van de heilige krachten, schrijft Prof. Luiz Carlos Mariano da Rosa, gebaseerd op de historisch-vergelijkende methode van Mircea Eliade, aan het gebed de voorwaarde toe van het opwekken van de heilige kracht in een proces dat in staat is om bovennatuurlijke invloed uit te oefenen en de uitsparingen van het bewustzijn te bereiken, zoals Marcel Mauss stelt. Door de magisch-religieuze praktijken en liturgisch-rituele processen (...) van het polytheïsme, het kenmerkende gebed van het monotheïsme van Israël, volgens het bijbelse-theologische veteranenperspectief, over elkaar heen te leggen, wordt een vreedzame relatie en een bondgenootschap getekend waarbij Jahve en de morele eisen die in zijn attributen worden geïmpliceerd, namelijk rechtvaardigheid, trouw en goedheid, samenkomen voor het leven in zijn historische volheid. Tot slot laat Prof. Luiz Carlos Mariano da Rosa zien dat het gebed, volgens het bijbels-theologische neotestheologische perspectief, de uitdrukking van het eschatologische bestaan tussen contingentie en transcendentie in Bultmann impliceert, waardoor de richtlijncreativiteit van God in Tillich wordt afgesloten en de staat van existentiële vervreemding wordt overwonnen. (shrink)

Se a pregação de Jesus consiste no pressuposto da teologia neotestamentária, segundo o pensamento de Bultmann, a análise do seu conteúdo emerge como fundamental para a compreensão do querigma cristão e da construção literário-teológica da comunidade primitiva. Dessa forma, o artigo se detém na pregação ético-escatológica de Jesus, que anuncia o reino de Deus e o tempo da decisão e o chamado à decisão, que converge para a radicalidade e exige a obediência escatológica enquanto realização da vontade de Deus. Assim, (...) escapando à condição de um dever que converge para a formação do caráter e ao princípio de determinação da comunhão humana, o artigo assinala que é a exigência do amor que se impõe à pregação escatológica de Jesus e a sua pregação ética e ao conhecimento da vontade de Deus, que implica o dever-ser e o poder-fazer envolvendo o bem incondicional em uma construção teórico-conceitual e subjetivo-existencial que envolve a consciência da situação-limite da existência e a necessidade de uma decisão existencial. (shrink)

Подчеркивая, что обращение к событиям, имевшим место ab origine, сходится, в соответствии с мифико-религиозной перспективой, к проявлению священных сил, профессор Луис Карлос Мариано да Роза, основываясь на историко-сравнительном методе Мирчи Элиаде, приписывает молитве состояние возбуждения священной силы в процессе, способном оказывать сверхъестественное воздействие и достигать глубин сознания, как утверждает Марсель Маусс. Таким образом, наложение магическо-религиозных практик и литургически-ритуальных процессов многобожия, характерной молитвы монотеизма Израиля, согласно библейско-богословской ветеранской перспективе, знаменует мирные отношения и союз, в который вовлечен Яхве и моральные требования, заложенные (...) в его атрибутах, а именно справедливость, верность и доброта, сходящиеся навстречу жизни в ее исторической полноте. Наконец, профессор Луис Карлос Мариано да Роза показывает, что молитва, согласно библейско-теологической неотестеологической перспективе, подразумевает выражение эсхатологического бытия между случайностью и трансцендентностью в Бультмане, закрытие директивного творчества Бога в Тиллихе и преодоление состояния экзистенциального отчуждения. (shrink)