Article on Moltmann

Writing dissertation is difficult at times. At times, your ideas won't come out of your head and flow through your fingers. You have your fingers on your keyboard but they won't press any keys at all. In times like this, I just look around the internet and google some words that are related to what I want to write. Of course, most of the times you find nothing. But there are times I find something I want to keep. I think a blog is a good place to keep the articles that prove to be helpful. I found this article about Moltmann and decided to keep it here.

One of the most influential theologians of his time, Moltmann was Professor of Systematic Theology at Tubingen University (in what was then Western Germany) for more than 25 years. During that time he was strongly influenced by both Karl Barth and Dietrich Bonhoeffer and, in the 1960s and 70s, was involved in the general Christian dialogue of the day with Marxists.

His distinct orientation of theology towards politics moved him later to focus on the European "Peace" and "Green" movements. He also became increasingly open to dialogue with exponents of Roman Catholic, Orthodox and liberation theology.

His theology can be generally classed as dialectical, in that he was concerned with tensions between aspects of Christian doctrine - the Cross and the Resurrection, death and life, an absent God and a present God and so on. All these he related to negative aspects of the world like sin, suffering and death as well as to positive aspects such as what he perceived as God's ongoing act of creation which was to issue in a new order.

Moltmann's extensive theology is, however, blighted by a methodological failing. In his earlier works such as Theology of Hope (1964) he derives his conclusions from the Bible. If in doing so he doesn't give enough credence to what were then well-substantiated  doubts about what biblical material is historical and what kerygmatic, his work is nevertheless relatively sound.

His later works display an increasing lack of awareness of the distinction between what Jesus may have thought, taught and lived out and the early Church's interpretation of what they knew about Jesus. Recent work has shown conclusively that the Jesus of history is a relatively shadowy figure. It also indicates strongly that early interpretations of Jesus were strongly influenced by reference to Old Testament theology (Isaiah for instance). He also appears to have little or no understanding of the analogical nature of theology - that is, the degree to which God-talk (theology) consists of image and metaphor.

As a result, Moltmann's theological castles appear today as elaborations built upon suspect foundations. Critics perceive them as somewhat ill-disciplined speculation tied too loosely to sound historical and critical biblical work. In a sense, Moltmann became unconsciously mythological.

Moltmann thought of God as centrally a "community of divine persons" (the Trinity) who interact in and with the world. Because this interaction is ongoing, theology (and therefore teaching) can never be completed. It is essentially "relational" - any standpoint is relative to others in a developing, organic relationship. But he appears to have had little difficulty with the central idea of revelation in relation to the whole body of human knowledge and understanding.
If God interacts with the world then change is natural. Moltmann's orientation was therefore strongly practical. Theology as a discourse aims to change the world (the opposite of stagnation) in order the better to orientate creation towards the coming kingdom of God.

This eschatological strand is common to all Moltmann's work. It's not an "end of all things in clouds of glory" sort of eschatology. Rather, he thought of it as changing the present in the direction of the "future" towards God's kingdom. The Resurrection of Jesus (however one understands it) is the first step. It sets in motion the new order and spells out the eventual end of evil, suffering and death.

Moltmann's practical streak emerges in his approach to the problem of pain and suffering. Why, if God "loves" us does he allow us to suffer so terribly? Moltmann doesn't offer a theoretical solution. Instead, he points to the way in which Jesus identifies with all sufferers through his death on the cross.

If the world of suffering doesn't correspond to our image of God now, we can recognise that there's a promise of a social reality which does. One can't help wondering how much Moltmann was influenced by post-war optimism in his conclusions. Instead of a personal development theory (people as individuals will develop towards perfection) he offers social improvement ending in a "kingdom of God".

Moltmann thinks that the bridge between the present and this wonderful social future is the Church. Because God loves the world, God affects it and is affected by it. (Moltmann rejects the teaching that God can't suffer or change.)

Therefore the Church can't claim to be absolute. It doesn't have access to final truth, nor can it teach that "salvation" is mediated only by Jesus. He goes further: the Church must be open to radical reform and renewal.

In the same way a practical eschatology reinforces and brings about radical changes in society. Humans don't rule nature, but relate to it as part of a whole community of living beings. Moltmann asserts that monotheism tends to legitimate monarchical domination and subjection. In contrast, the loving inter-relationship of the members of the Trinity demand human relationships of freedom and equality, and a recognition of human rights.

The source of the life-giving process in which we are all so deeply involved is, thinks Moltmann, what is usually called the "Spirit": "… the eternal Spirit is the divine wellspring of life - the source of life created, life preserved and life daily renewed, and finally the source of eternal life of all created being" (The Spirit of Life). This emphasis marked Moltmann's break with Barth, who thought of the Spirit as primarily the source of the revelation of God's truth.

Absolute point of view

Reading an academic theology book gives you a feeling that very little of the content of the book would be applicable for the ministry or at least to your present situation. You have this inkling that the author would address issues that are relevant only among professional theologians. They are those who write articles, essays and books that the ordinary minister find useless in their own teaching and preaching. For me, it is always a delight to dig up some treasures deeply buried in theological books. Or perhaps it is just me, too slow to find the connection.

It is a joy to find some passages that speak directly to me and somewhat connect to what I am experiencing personally. Moltmann's book The Crucified God (or many of his books for that matter) always does that to me. Although, I believe Moltmann himself have no idea that the words he has written would speak to somebody in Asia doing missionary works.

I am bothered endlessly by the reality that Christians who believe that salvation is by grace through faith alone, that Jesus Christ is the only way to have a loving relationship with God could not have a authentic loving relationship with each other. Sad to say that the hairline crack that ends up in breaking apart is almost always caused by differences in theological preferences, minor doctrinal differences and certain way of interpreting the word of God. This happen when people start believing that their views alone are right and the all the others are wrong. Theirs are the only absolute truth.

Moltmann says ‘that theology must include reflections upon its own point of view... an attempt to adopt an absolute point of view would be equivalent to having no point of view at all. To make one's own point of view absolute would be stupidity. This does not amount to relativism. Anyone who understand the relativity, will see himself as relative to others; but this does not mean giving up one's own position. To see one's own point of view as relative to that of others means to live in concrete relationships and to think out one's own ideas in relationship to the thought of others. To have no relationship would be death.’ (The Crucified God, 10-11).

What a joyful day!

This is a joyful day for me. The books from a good friend have arrived at this very moment and I could not hold back my self from posting about it. Now I feel like a child who has been given a lot of toys and Iam so excited that I don’t know which toy I would start playing with. I'm expecting 4 books but I receive 5. I'm doing my best not to divulge the giver of the gifts because you might harass and compel him to give you books as well (just kidding). Friends are gift from God, I feel so blessed today…Million of thanks!

J. Moltmann, Experiences in Theology (Hardbound)
J. Moltmann, Science and Wisdom
G. Muller-Fahrenholz, The Kingdom and the Power: The Theology of Jürgen Moltmann
R. Bauckham, God Will Be All in All: The Eschatology of Jürgen Moltmann
G. Guttierez, The Making of Modern Theology.

Moltmann on theology of freedom

Theology in modern times will necessarily be a theology of freedom. The modern world came into being as a results of freedom movements and is further caught up in such movements. Because church and theology clung too long to the traditional 'authoritarian principle', many freedom movements sided with atheism. If Christianity wants to get the better of modern atheism, it must first overcome the impact of atheism and show that the biblical God of the exodus of the people and the resurrection of Christ does not get in the way of human freedom, but is rather the basis for it, preserves and defends it.

Jurgen Moltmann. Theology Today. SCM Press LTD, 1988.

Why I Like Moltmann?

This post is actually a comment I made about Ben Myers' wonderings, he finds it incomprehensible that far more is written about Moltmann than Pannenberg. Although I wholly agree with him that Pannenberg is a "better" theologian and his theology perhaps is more sophisticated. However, more than a good theologian there are reasons that I believe scholars and theologians find Moltmann theology worth engaging for.

Moltmann's theology has the “ability” to dialogue with other theologies than any other contemporary theologians (as far as I am is concerned and I maybe wrong). Some scholars would claim that his Theology of Hope is the forerunner of theologies of liberations. And I agree that after 40 years of publication the book is still relevant in our context. He is able to dialogue with third world theolgy with TH and Crucified God. In fact, the theology of struggle that is developing here have taken a lot from Moltmann's works. His pneumatology is able to dialogue with Pentecostal/Charismatic issues worldwide. Although, it does not resolve the problem, he paved the way for a theological discussions regarding healings, speaking in tounges and other Pentecostal issues that were making a problem in many denominations. Also, his theology is able to dialogue with many issues in practical theology.

His relational trinity in TTKG makes sense to us than any other books because of our cultural values with regards to relationship. This work is something we can understand. His panentheism i believe speaks volume to people with animistic culture. And many more... I guess

As Christians in Asia and the third world continue to outnumber Christians in North America and Europe... I guess Moltmann's theology will become more and more relevant.