HOME SOME THEMES IN ENGLISH THEOLOGICAL THEMES THE CLIMAX OF ALL REVELATION
THE UNSURPASSABLE CLIMAX OF ALL REVELATION
Giuse Phạm Thanh Liêm, S.J.
a.
Knowledge of God through natural mediation
i.
Transcendental and categorical knowledge
b.
Knowledge of God through prophetic mediation
2. The unsurpassable climax of all revelation
a.
The climax of all revelation
i.
The possibility of the unsurpassable climax of all revelation
ii.
Jesus by non-Christian view: one among others
b.
Jesus: Absolute savior by Christian view
i.
Self-consciousness of the founder of religions
ii.
Absolute by Christian faith
The plurality of religions is a fact nobody can refute.
Believers of every religion suppose their respective religion and the founder
of their religion are the best: Christians claim Jesus is the Absolute and
surpasses all founders of any other religions. Being a Christian and a
theologian, Karl Rahner talked about “the unsurpassable climax of all
revelation,” and stated that “the history of revelation has its unsurpassable
high point through the hypostatic union and in the incarnation of God in the
created, spiritual reality of Jesus for his own sake, and hence for the sake of
all of us.”[1] In my
opinion, however, it is impossible to justify that Jesus is the unsurpassable
climax of all revelation for a non-Christian point of view.
I will examine the problem first via revelation as
knowledge of God, then via the possibility of the unsurpassable climax of all
revelation.
Human beings possess not only knowledge of natural
science but also knowledge of the Reality, which surpasses all creatures.
Knowledge of God can be given in transcendental experience or revelation. Thus,
I will treat knowledge of God through natural mediation, then knowledge of God
through historical mediation, finally the relativity of knowledge of God.
Plato created the theory of knowledge as reminiscence of soul toward the
ideal world. According to this theory, ideas in the ideal world are the very
real and eternal realities. Although Aristotle was Plato’s student, he
disagreed with his teacher, and created the theory that maintains human beings
gain knowledge in contacting material objects via the senses. Aristotle
distinguished various levels of knowledge, such as opinion, physical science,
metaphysical knowledge, etc. Knowledge of God here supposes knowledge of the
world.
Today philosophers and theologians have developed the transcendental
experience. If God exists, if God loves human beings, and if God wants to
reveal Himself to human beings, then God creates human beings in a way so they
will be able to receive His revelations. God creates human beings as beings of
intelligence and love to respond to the revelation of God. In their
experiences, human beings recognize themselves as limited beings, as
intelligent beings, as beings of love. Consequently, through transcendental knowledge,
human beings recognize God as a God of intelligence, of love, of omnipotence.
Transcending is an act of human beings to experience, to recognize and to meet
God as transcendental reality.
According to Karl Rahner, transcendental experience implies
transcendental knowledge. Rahner said about transcendental experience:
“We shall call transcendental
experience the subjective, unthematic, necessary and unfailing consciousness of
the knowing subject that is co-present in every spiritual act of knowledge, and
the subject’s openness to the unlimited expanse of all possible reality. It is
an experience because this knowledge, unthematic but ever-present, is a moment
within and a condition of possibility for every concrete experience of any and
every object. This experience is called transcendental experience because it
belongs to the necessary and inalienable structures of the knowing subject
itself, and because it consists precisely in the transcendence beyond any
particular group of possible objects or of categories. Transcendental
experience is the experience of transcendence, in which experience the
structure of the subject and therefore also the ultimate structure of every
conceivable object of knowledge are present together and in identity. This
transcendental experience, of course, is not merely an experience of pure
knowledge, but also of the will and of freedom.”[2]
For Karl Rahner, knowledge of God is implied in transcendental
experience. Categorical knowledge of God expresses and supposes transcendental
experience in a certain measure. Transcendental knowledge is a posteriori
knowledge that comes after knowledge of the world.
“There is present in this
transcendental experience an unthematic and anonymous, as it were, knowledge of
God. Hence the original knowledge of God is not the kind of knowledge in which
one grasps an object which happens to present itself directly or indirectly
from outside. It has rather the character of a transcendental experience.”[3]
He continues:
“Man’s only knowledge of God is an a
posteriori knowledge from the world. This is still true even with verbal
revelation because this too has to work with human concepts. Hence our
transcendental knowledge or experience has to be called a posteriori insofar as
every transcendental experience is mediated by a categorical encounter with
concrete reality in our world, both the world of things and the world of
persons. This is also true of the knowledge of God. To that extent we can and
we must say that all knowledge of God is an a posteriori knowledge which comes
from and through encountering the world, to which, of course, we ourselves also
belong.”[4]
Through the senses and natural or historical
mediations human being can have transcendental experience of the Absolute. From
these transcendental experiences and knowledge of the world, human beings have
categorical knowledge of the Absolute, expressed by various cultures, various
images, words and symbols. Thematic knowledge supposes unthematic knowledge.
Knowledge of God expressed by word supposes transcendental knowledge, but
transcendental experience is an ineffable experience.
By means of creatures as a symbol, for example, a natural flower, an act
of love, etc., human beings can transcend to meet the Absolute. Through
creature, human beings recognize God as creator; by means of their
intelligence, human beings recognize God as intelligent One; by human love,
human beings recognize God as person and lover. However, God or the Absolute is
not limited as a human intelligence, God is not person as human being is
person, God’s love is not limited as human love. Through creature, human beings
recognize God, but human beings recognize the unlimited distance between human
beings and the Absolute. Human beings recognize themselves as limited beings,
and by that they recognize unlimited being who is God or the Absolute.
Recognizing the Absolute is a free knowledge.
Therefore, someone can refute this knowledge. For example, atheists refuse to
accept the existence of God; agnostics refuse to accept the knowledge about
God. That was reason why Emmanuel Kant proposed a distinction between practical
reason and pure reason. History of philosophies gives us the proof of that.
Kant proposed three transcendental realities: the immortality of soul, the
existence of God, and freedom. These realities cannot be demonstrated, so
people have to accept them. Those are realities by a convention, not by proof.
Here we have to acknowledge that by transcendental experience people don’t
demonstrate the existence of God, but recognize it. Here we can explain the
phenomena of the atheist as a lack of transcendental experience, so they don’t
recognize God. It is similar to a person born color blind that cannot recognize
the color that others can recognize.
Whereas for atheists transcendental experience and knowledge of God is
not valid, it is valid for theists. Accepting transcendental knowledge is a
necessary condition to discuss the theological problem. Not accepting it,
nobody can discuss theology. Transcendental knowledge is a supposition of
theological knowledge. Once people accept the transcendental realities,
theology exists. These suppositions are beliefs of faithful. Of course, to
believe something human beings have to experience it even in the case where
they cannot demonstrate it; as is said in Tao Te Ching “the way which is
demonstrable is not the eternal way”. Human beings can only demonstrate what is
in the same level with them. Something that human beings can demonstrate belongs
to the same level with argument or human beings. However, the Absolute
surpasses all realities.
All knowledge of God implies, in a certain meaning, a revelation that
stimulates transcendental experience. Through revelation with transcendental
experience, the Absolute reveals himself to human beings. In the history of
ideas, human beings always recognize the existence of God. We can see it
through the history of eastern philosophy and western philosophy. Through
creature and intellects, human beings recognize God who is in the universe. The
Absolute is transcendent and immanent in every creature.
Through Eastern thought the ultimate reality is expressed as NONE that
is not “nothing” but “no things” and includes everything. Western thought
insists on the first being that is the Absolute or God. The Reality’s two
contrary names reflect the ineffability of the Reality.
John Hick is a famous pluralist.
His position is influenced by Western thought. For him, the Real is not a
thing, is not thing, but not nothing. The Real is not a thing because it
transcends all thing and all our thing-concepts; but the Real is not nothing
because it is immanent in all thing, “englobes” all thing[5].
The Real is neither personal nor impersonal,[6]
but it has its analogues of the attributes of its other authentic “personae” as
love, goodness, compassion, justice, mercy, and “impersonae” as transcendence,
immanence.[7]
That happened because people talk about the Real in relation with human beings.
The Real in itself cannot correspond to the anthropomorphic image, so the
distinction between the Real in itself and its various experienceable
“personae” has to be forgotten, but people can speak of the Real in mythical
language in personal and in non-personal terms. The Real can be worshipped as
one or other of its “personae”- Allah, the Holy Trinity, Adonai, Vishnu and so
on, and can be meditated as one of its “impersonae”- the Tao, Brahman, the
Dharma, Sunyata and so on.[8]
All religions and philosophies in human history possess knowledge of
God. In the Eastern religions, Reality is ineffable, so no language can totally
express God.
Many religions claim to have revelation in their religions, for example,
Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam.
The bible of Judaism told about the relation between God, Abraham and
his ancestors. In the history of Judaism and for the people of the Far East,
prophetism was an event that influenced the social, political and religious
situation in that time.
Prophets speak in the name of God, and explain the historical events in
the view of God. Through the words of prophets human beings recognize more
about God or the Absolute reality. One might say that through prophets’ words
as mediation, human beings recognize God more and more.
That which happened in Judaism could have happened in Hinduism and other
religions. God could use different symbols according to different people with
different cultures to reveal so that human beings understand God more and more.
God is ineffable; each revelation reflects one aspect of God. Accepting
revelation in other religions helps human beings to understand more and more
God. In Hinduism there are many symbols, the same is true in Islam, and in Christianity.
However, some religions do not claim to have revelation. These religions have
possessed the deep treasury of wisdom on the universe and the first principle
as the None.
The history of Judaism shows prophets related closely to Israel’s
history. The prophets interpret the history of Israel in the light of God’s
view. The prophet is man of God: that is, through him God speaks to His people.
He is a symbol for God’s presence. But what happened in the Judaism’s history,
also happened in other religions as Hinduism, Islam, Christianity. It is not
fair to believe in revelation in one religion and refuse revelation in other
religion. Believing in human beings and their witness is one very important
thing for humankind. By normal belief,
one who believes in Israel’s revelation must also open their heart to
revelation in other world religions. The founders of religions received the
experiences of God through revelation.
Once receiving the experiences of God, they have transmitted what they
have received to others around them. With social rites to worship the Absolute,
religions begin.
Christianity accepts and makes his own Judaism’s revelation, but Judaism
doesn’t accept Jesus as Messiah. Islam believes in the Yahweh of Judaism but
doesn’t recognize Jesus as God incarnate. For Islamic Mahomet is the best
prophet, while for Christians Jesus Christ is God incarnate and thus the best
revelation of God.
Revelation is considered as knowledge of God. Therefore, the idea of
truth is included. For Christianity, in order to expand the revelation and
protect the integrity of revelation, both the idea of transmission and
interpretation are proposed. However, the problems of revelation, transmission
and interpretation are not important for Western religions.
According to Christian theologians, God revealed himself and his plan of
salvation to human beings. Similarly some religions have accepted the idea of
true expression of revelations. Judaism, Christianity and Islam have claimed
themselves as religions possessing revelation. Therefore, they have inspired
books that contain truths as true expressions of their religions.
Human beings can transmit what they were revealed to others by
expressing them in language formulations. By these expressions others can
understand and receive the same with people who receive revelations directly.
By interpretation and hermeneutics human beings of the late generations can
understand what was revealed to human beings.
According to Thomas Aquinas, truth is the identification of intellect to
object. True or false are the attributes of judgment. If there is no judgment,
there is no true or false. The truth is an expression that reflects completely
a reality. An expression is formed by definite culture and time, so it is
limited in time and in certain culture. Through an expression, human beings of
this time can understand differently from those of the other time, so there is
not the eternal expression for all time. With interpretation and tradition,
human beings of different cultures and times can understand correctly the
expressions of revelation of different times.
There is another concept about
revelation, expression of revelation and truth. Nobody can completely understand
an object. Human beings are limited. For Kant human beings can understand
phenomena but not noumena. Even though the object is limited, human beings
cannot understand it completely; Given this, what can human intellects do when
the object of the intellect is infinite and ineffable being!
Both human beings and their
reason are limited, so their comprehension is limited. There is not a truth as
complete identification between reason and reality. Religions that don’t claim
its possession of revelation accept the idea of “relative expression”, for
example, Taoism or Buddhism. Taoists say, “The way that can be demonstrated is
not the eternal way, the name that can be named is not the eternal name.”
For
non-Christian views, concretely Buddhism and Taoism, revelation is strange and
very relative. Reality is ineffable. Human beings can understand Reality more
and more, but it is impossible to say something that reflects completely the
Absolute. Between believers of Christianity and Oriental believers, there is
not ultimate agreement on revelation. If revelation is not important, neither
is the climax of revelation, nor the expressions of revelation.
The unsurpassable climax of all revelation can be questioned in religions
that claim revelation as Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Nature and
human beings can be the means of revelation, symbols of God’s presence.
Nonetheless, what is the best means or symbol of all revelation, what is the
most important content of revelation? The unsurpassable climax of all
revelation can be understood as means and as content.
For Karl Rahner, the natural revelation of God already implies a certain
disclosure of God as the infinite mystery[9].
“The historical and personal
revelation in word encounters the inner, spiritual uniqueness of man… and gives
man in his transcendence the possibility to accept this personal
self-communication and self-disclosure, to listen and to accept it in faith,
hope and love,”[10]
That is, the human being is the best field for
revelation.
Because human beings are historical, relations between God and human beings
happen in history.
“The transcendental revelation
is itself always mediated categorically in the world, because all of man’s
transcendentality has history.”[11]
History- events realized by human beings- are fields
of revelation.
“It takes place in the historical
material of a person’s life, but does not for this reason become simply
identical with it. If, then, this supernatural determination is to take place
in the concrete, and especially, if God’s self-revelation in grace is to become
the principle of concrete action in its objective and reflexive consciousness,
and hence also in the dimension of society, then God’s non-objective and
unreflexive self-revelation in grace must always be present as mediated in
objective and reflexive knowledge, regardless in the first instance of whether
this is an explicitly and thematically religious mediation or not.”[12]
“This ‘mediation’ has its
history…this mediation is itself God’s revelation.”[13]
One distinct mediation of revelation is the prophet. The prophet, according to
Rahner, is bearer of revelation in the full sense[14].
The first level of revelation is revelation through nature. The second
is done through history and prophetic mediation. Through the prophet understood
as God’s man, human beings understand God more and more.
“If history is also the history
of what is always unique and unrepeatable, then universal history always contains
particular history, and this latter still always remains a moment within the
whole universal history. Insofar as this revelation has a history because of
the historicity of reflection upon God’s self-gift to man in grace-and indeed
this history is differentiated within universal history- the history of
revelation has its absolute climax when God’s self-communication reaches its
unsurpassable high point through the hypostatic union and in the incarnation of
God in the created, spiritual reality of Jesus for his own sake, and hence for
the sake of all of us.”[15]
By this line of reasoning, if there is a man who is possessed by God
until it can be said that there is the hypostatic union or the incarnation of
God in that created, spiritual reality of someone, then that person is the
unsurpassable climax of all revelation.
In every religion, there are people who encountered God and had a
wonderful life with God. Who is the climax, the best symbol of the Absolute for
believers of these respective religions, and who is the climax of all
revelation in all religions?
Ernst Troeltsch in the early time of his life supposed Jesus to be the
absolute, but in his later life he changed his mind and asserted the position that
Jesus was not the absolute in comparison with other religions’ founders. This
position is found in his book “The Absoluteness of Christianity and the
History of Religions”[16].
After Troeltsch, many pluralist theologians defended the position that Jesus is
one among the absolutes.
Christianity appeared lately in comparison with other religions such as
Judaism, Hinduism, and Buddhism. Every
religion has its own founder. How could
the Christ, founder of Christianity, be superior to other founders? Through history Christianity has had many
evil things as crusades, ambition of popes, etc. Every religion has its founder
who is a very good human being. These
founders have led good lives, and had deep experiences with God. They are Christs analogously of their
people, of believers in the religions they founded. In certain measure they acted as Christ for other religions in
God's salvation plan. The founders of other religions taught human beings to
live correctly and happily; and by their teachings many people did the
charitable works for human beings. The
spiritualities of other religions are very deep and full of wisdom. In this time many Christians are learning to
meet God by Yoga and Zen ways. By these
categories of evaluation, Christianity is inferior to Hinduism and Buddhism.
Therefore, it is irrational to replace their founders with the founder of
Christianity.
Therefore, from non-Christian view, Jesus is not the climax of all
revelation.
“We are
calling saviour here that historical subjectivity in which, first, this process
of God’s absolute self-communication to the spiritual world as a whole exists irrevocably;
secondly, that process in which this divine self-communication can be
recognized unambiguously as irrevocable; and thirdly, that process in which
God’s self-communication reaches its climax insofar as this climax must be understood
as a moment within the total history of the human race, and as such must not
simply be identified with the totality of the spiritual world under God’s
self-communication.”[17]
The human being is the best
creature among material creatures, so human beings are the best symbol of God,
the image of God, the transparent symbol of God.
“Historical person who appears in time and space and
signifies the beginning of the absolute self-communication of God which is
moving towards its goal, that beginning which indicates that this
self-communication for everyone has taken place irrevocably and has been
victoriously inaugurated.”[18]
The great
prophet of each religion is the founder of each respective religion. For
Muslims, Mahomet is the best prophet and symbol; for Confucianism, Confucius is
the best teacher of all generations; for Christianity, Christ is the best
reflection of God, so much so that Christians say Jesus Christ is God
incarnate. What are standards to recognize who is the absolute savior? The
standard is the consciousness of founders about themselves.
All believers of any denomination supposed their religion would be the
best one, which is expressed by missionary work in the history of each
respective religion. To be more objective, it is better to examine the
self-recognition of the founder of religions, or of human beings as symbols of
God. For Buddhism, everyone is equal; everyone is Buddha in being. For Islam,
Mahomet is the greatest prophet.
Now we examine Jesus’ consciousness about himself. The bible is
understood as books of the Church that describe the beliefs of the Church. By
that Christians acknowledged Jesus, through the witness of the apostles, was
conscious of his mission more and more with time. Until now in the viewpoint of
biblical scholars there is not the proof that justifies the consciousness of
Jesus about himself as God although he was conscious of himself as coming from
God, as prophet, as messiah.
Some would like to say that Jesus as God incarnate or Jesus’
consciousness about himself as God incarnate is the work of the apostles.
However, why did the apostles make this confession, especially since this
belief went against the traditional beliefs of Judaism? Some people would like to
say that Jesus died by elders’ and scribes’ hate, but why did all the people
want Jesus’ death unless people saw Jesus as having committed a horrible sin
“blasphemy.” Otherwise, it is not possible to understand about the change of
people’s position for Jesus. Why had people acclaimed him as prophet claimed
the death of cross to Jesus in the trial of Pilate? I think that in the
tribunal of Pilate Jesus’ consciousness about himself, as “at the right hand of
God” became clearer and clearer. And this story was reported by the synoptic
writers. If the divinisation of Jesus had been realized by the apostles, why
would they have dared to do the horrible thing that is against their faith in
God who is unique? People today could say that many believers of world religions
deified the founders of respective religions. However, Mahomet was not deified
as God, nobody in Hinduism was deified as God. Only in Christianity did
Christians worship Jesus as God incarnate.
In Rahner’s terminology, incarnation expresses the union of man to God
so much so that the human person is God himself, so that it can be said that
God’s second person is that man. The absolute savior is conceived as a human
being conscious of himself as instrument used by God to save human beings. Once
Jesus is the climax of revelation as absolute savior, he is the absolute means
for universal salvation.
In Rahner’s writings, the absolute savior is possible, but he did not
prove who is the absolute savior. However, in the topic “Jesus Christ in
Non-Christian Religions” Karl Rahner talked in the name of dogmatic theology[19].
“But this takes place in the
incarnation of the Logos because here what is expressed and communicated, namely,
God himself, and, secondly, the mode of expression, that is, the human reality
of Christ in his life and in his final state, and, thirdly, the recipient Jesus
in grace and in the vision of God, all three have become absolutely one.
In Jesus, God’s communication to man in grace and at the same time its
categorical self-interpretation in the corporeal, tangible and social dimension
have reached their climax, have become revelation in an absolute sense. But
this means that the event of Christ becomes for us the only really tangible
caesura in the universal history of salvation and revelation, and it enables us
to distinguish a particular and official history of revelation within the
universal history of revelation before Christ.”[20]
Until now biblical scholars did not have proof to
affirm that Jesus’ death had the cause by his claim of divinity. If this is
proven, Jesus will be the absolute savior granted by biblical exegesis.
Otherwise, Jesus is the absolute savior only in the Christian belief.
Jesus Christ is absolute according to Christian faith. Until now, it is
impossible to demonstrate the absoluteness of Jesus Christ to non-Christians.
If someone believes Jesus Christ is God incarnated, the absoluteness of Jesus
Christ is already included. The remaining problem is to help others to believe
that Jesus Christ is absolute, is the Son of God, and is God incarnated. That
is done through works of kerygma, of announcements, of preaching, of
catechisms. However a very important truth has to be noticed: “no one can say
Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit” (1Cor.12, 3). Nobody can assert the
objectivity of the faith as proof that makes others accept Christian faith as a
mathematic truth.
If it is proven that Jesus is God incarnate, thus
Jesus is the unsurpassable climax of all revelation. But until now in the
non-Christian view, we cannot provide proofs that Jesus is the hypostatic union
of God or the God incarnate.
We have just looked over revelation. Through natural mediation and
transcendental experience human beings recognize the existence of the Absolute
who is infinite. Through revelation of historical and prophetical mediation
human beings acknowledge the ultimate and ineffable Reality who is love. The
founders of religions are people who experience God profoundly. They are
symbols of God’s presence and actions in humankind.
Human beings follow what they see the best. Therefore, they follow
whichever religion they recognize the best. Whenever they recognize any
religion better than the one they are following, they will follow the new one.
From a non-Christian view, Jesus is not better than their founder of their
religions.
Jesus is the unsurpassable climax of all revelation by Christian view.
Only if someone believes that Jesus is God incarnate, Word become flesh, Jesus
is the unsurpassable climax of all revelation.
Hick John. A Christian Theology
of Religions, The rainbow of Faiths. Kentucky: John Knox Press-Louisville,
1995.
Rahner,
Karl. Foundations of Christian Faith: An Introduction to the Idea of
Christianity. New York: Crossroad, 1995.
Troeltsch,
Ernst. The Absoluteness of Christianity and the History of Religions.
Richmond: John Knox Press, 1971.
HOME SOME THEMES IN ENGLISH THEOLOGICAL THEMES THE CLIMAX OF ALL REVELATION
Chúc bạn an vui hạnh
phúc.
Giuse Phạm Thanh Liêm, S.J.
[1] Karl Rahner, Foundations of Christian Faith: An Introduction to the Idea of Christianity, (New York: Crossroad, 1995) 174
[2] Karl Rahner, Foundations of Christian Faith: An Introduction to the Idea of Christianity, (New York: Crossroad, 1995) 20
[3] Ibid, 21
[4] Ibid, 52
[5] Cfr. John Hick, A Christian Theology of Religions, The Rainbow of Faiths, WESTMINSTER JOHN KNOX PRESS-LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY 1995, p. 60
[6] John Hick, Op. cit., p. 61
[7] John Hick, Op. cit., p. 62
[8] John Hick, Op. cit., p. 64-65
[9] Karl Rahner, Op. cit., p. 170
[10] Karl Rahner, Op. cit., p. 171
[11] Karl Rahner, Foundations of Christian Faith: An Introduction to the Idea of Christianity, (New York: Crossroad, 1995) 172-173
[12] Karl Rahner, Foundations of Christian Faith: An Introduction to the Idea of Christianity, (New York: Crossroad, 1995) 173
[13] Karl Rahner, Foundations of Christian Faith: An Introduction to the Idea of Christianity, (New York: Crossroad, 1995) 173
[14] Karl Rahner, Op. cit., p. 173
[15] Karl Rahner, Op. cit., p. 174
[16] Ernst Troeltsch, The Absoluteness of Christianity and the History of Religions (Richmond: John Knox Press, 1971)
[17] Karl Rahner, Op. cit., p. 194
[18] Karl Rahner, Op. cit., p. 193
[19] Karl Rahner, Foundations of Christian Faith: An Introduction to the Idea of Christianity, (New York: Crossroad, 1995) 312
[20] Karl Rahner, Op. cit., p. 174-175