Footnotes, Chapter 13
Kierkegaard and Radical Discipleship: A New Perspective (Eller)
This file is provided for browsers lacking the ability to show notes in pop-up windows, and for those wishing to print the document with endnotes.
In Dru’s and in Rohde’s selections from Kierkegaard’s journals, the number identifies an entry rather than a page; the date following is that of the particular entry.
4. Ibid., 6.
5. Niels Thulstrup, "The Complex of Problems Called 'Kierkegaard,'" in Critique, 295. Cf. John Wild, "The Rebirth of the Divine," in Christianity and Existentialism, 159, 165.
7. Ibid., 11.
10. Ibid., 29.
11. Ibid., 162.
12. Ibid., 32.
13. Ibid., 118.
17. Ibid., 27-28 [my trans.--V.E.]
18. Mack Senior, a letter to Count Charles August (1711), in Durnbaugh, Origins, 163. The letter is an apology and plea for tolerance addressed to the Count, who had expelled Mack and the other Brethren from his territory.
20. S.K.'s appeal to the Gospels, on the face of it, might seem to coincide with the general movement of nineteenth century theology, with its Quest of the Historical Jesus and all. However, there was a decided difference in orientation which makes any correlation very problematical. Most certainly, S.K. did not use the New Testament as a source hook for dogmatic definitions (in any case, this interest inevitably centers in the Pauline materials rather than the Gospels). But just as certainly, S.K. did not use the New Testament as source material for a scientific-critical study designed to explain the origin and rise of Christianity as a historical phenomenon which consequently had evolved into a nineteenth century religion. S.K. showed no interest at all in this "objective" problem of New Testament research nor in the scientific methods of exegesis it employed. The pages that follow will make it clear that S.K. did not read the Gospels in order to formulate Søren Kierkegaard's opinion of Jesus of Nazareth but to discover Jesus' opinion of Søren Kierkegaard. This personalized, devotional, life-centered approach is essentially sectarian-pietistic rather than nineteenth century historical-critical.
22. Dru Journals, 1008 (1849). Luther could have spared himself at least some of S.K.'s wrath if he had picked any book other than James to call "straw"; but seriously, the completely different evaluation that Luther and S.K. put upon that epistle stands as a very accurate symbol of the difference between churchly and sectarian Protestantism.
24. Papirer, 10:2:A:548 (1850), quoted in Diem, Dialectic, 274-75. Our study has come full circle. We used Deissmann's statement about Paul to introduce a thesis concerning S.K. The compliment is here returned as S.K. supports Deissmann's thesis.
26. Ibid., 64.
30. Ibid., 54.
35. Ibid., 59. S.K.'s examples of Christian requirements are as revealing as the point to which he was speaking.
37. Ibid., stanza 321.