Kierkegaard

[The Conductor]

While I realize that he wasn't really a theologian, but a philosopher, I do appreciate some of his writings, especially his edifying discourse on James 1:17-22 and his "Crowd is Untruth". I was wondering if any of you have read any of his works? (Feel free to tell me if some of them have some error, both as a human being and as an existentialist philosopher he was bound to have some disagreements with confessional Lutheranism.)

 

[Obedientiarius]

I have read some bits and pieces of Kierkegaard. I liked some of it, disliked others. Ultimately, he didn't make too strong an impression on me.

 

[ContraMundum]

While I realize that he wasn't really a theologian, but a philosopher, I do appreciate some of his writings, especially his edifying discourse on James 1:17-22 and his "Crowd is Untruth". I was wondering if any of you have read any of his works? (Feel free to tell me if some of them have some error, both as a human being and as an existentialist philosopher he was bound to have some disagreements with confessional Lutheranism.)

I've been a fan for years. Really impacted me and I think he was an insightful and sound theologian in his own right as well. He butted heads with the Danish church for the right reasons. As a man of integrity, he saw the rampant hypocrisy and clericalism of the church as clearly against the teachings of Jesus. He's a bit like the Lutheran Pietists, who had a good message that set the cat among the pigeons- and the effects were both good and in some cases less than good. But I think overall quite good!

 

[dms1972]

Apart from some quotes, the only writting of his I have read any of is The Sickness Unto Death. It took me a while to check out any of his writings since reading Francis Schaeffer had kind of warned me off. Then I said to myself "I am just going to read a chapter or two of this guy to see for myself" rather than always taking Schaeffers critiques as infallible (that said I still find Schaeffer is very good in many respects)

A lot of the short summary statements that there are of what Kierkegarrd's philosophy was are too simple.

I think he has some insights, but isn't always easy to understand. He's probably not for everyone. He comes from the Biblical realism school.

More detailed and sympathic critiques of his thought I'd recommend are:

Donald Bloesch - A Theology of Word and Spirit, (the introduction to Bloesch's seven volume Christian Foundations), but has a section on Kierkegarrd.

William Barrett - Irrational Man (about existentialism in general, covers four of the seminal figures - Kierkegarrd, Heidegger, Sartre, Neitzsche - even though some disavowed the label 'existentialist' )

Karl Stern - The Flight From Woman, insightful chapter on Kierkegarrd, his personality and character.

 

[FireDragon76]

I plan to begin reading Kierkegaard during Lent this year. I'd like a different religious perspective. It's been difficult to find English-language information about his main theological counterpoint, Nikolai Grundtvig, however, but I gather he was a high churchman that mixed in alot of nationalism and romanticism into his theology.

I plan to read this book by a Lutheran pastor in California, Kierkegaard for the Church:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00FBGZBRU/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

I'm also planning to read Sickness unto Death. Any other suggestions for a Kierkegaard reading list for Lutherans?

 

[dms1972]

There are the Discourses, eighteen of them, though published originally in smaller volumes.

Eighteen Upbuilding Discourses - Wikipedia

 

[FireDragon76]

I read enough Kierkegaard during Lent to realize I am not able to appreciate him. He seems like a pietist in the most unwholesome way. As far as existentialism goes, I think Nietzsche is alot more interesting.

 

[Resha Caner]

I read enough Kierkegaard during Lent to realize I am not able to appreciate him. He seems like a pietist in the most unwholesome way. As far as existentialism goes, I think Nietzsche is alot more interesting.

I don't know that I swallow any philosopher whole. Rather, I take bits and pieces here and there.

 

[dms1972]

Kierkegaard is helpful to some but certainly not for everyone. There does seem to be a strongly individualist accent to his thought. I read what I have of him, to find out for myself, after having read evangelical critiques, whether or not he would be helpful, and to see if I thought the critique seemed fair. To be honest it is not easy to always get what he is saying. While often there is emphasis about purity of heart, and will (belief seems to be mainly a matter of the will for him - to believe is to obey - that's why its hard to believe). There are several aspect to his thought another related area is his concern about recovering the capacity for being with God and walking with God rather than just thinking about doctrine (I find him helpful in that regard). He also thinks we need a Teacher (who is God) to find Truth, contra Plato, and on that I would agree. But there is the theme of faith as a leap in the dark without any certainty. To wait for complete certainty does seem like attempting to sidestep the need for faith I grant, but can we not take steps of faith to begin with, and have answers to some questions?