About nonreligious Christianity. We can find in these words that the Apostle Paul talks about a new creation or new man "in Christ Jesus." Here there is nothing specifically religious, here "Do not mean anything neither circumcision nor uncircumcision" (Gal. 6:15). It is "a person's life for others, it is love that connects us together with the foundation of our being and manifests itself among the irreconcilable contradictions of our existence. At the highest level, it manifested itself on the cross, but it can be found everywhere, where are the Christ, where he known in "a completely different type of life-relationships, different from anything known in the world." For here there really redemption and resurrection - Under arbitrarily "secular" external form. The Christian community does not exist for the spread of a new religion, but simply to embody this new being, being as love. And that means returning to the conclusion to Bonhoeffer, "complicity in the powerlessness of God in the world."
«Christians stand with God in His suffering, is what distinguishes them from the pagans. Jesus asked in Gethsemane: "So, could ye not one o'clock watch with me?" This is the exact opposite everything that religious man expects from God. God calls man to share his suffering at the hands of the godless world.
Therefore, he must immerse themselves in life of the godless world, without trying to podlakirovat its godlessness with religion or convert it. He must live "on-worldly", just so he participates the sufferings of God. He has the right to live "in a worldly, in other words, he is free from false religious ties and disturbances. Being a Christian does not mean to be religious to one or another manner, the build of himself on a technique sinner, a penitent or a saint, a Christian - it means to be human. Christian does these are not a religious act, but participation in the suffering of God in the life of the world. "
But if we take seriously this last phrase, we must evaluate the consequences such a radical call for non-religious Christianity. What does this mean in regard to membership of a Christian society and religious acts, who play it so important?
J. Robinson. To be honest before God.
terrible book, yes. For those not afraid of dizziness, when we remember Shestov.
terrible and in a way very serious.
is worth at least this quote:
I can at least understand those claims that we had better (although, of course, impossible) to stop using the word "God" for the lifetime of at least a generation - so the word soaked performances, which is time part - if we want to make the Gospel has not lost its value.
For I am convinced that among the traditional orthodox supernaturalizmom, in the language которого выражена наша вера, и теми категориями, в которых осмысливает происходящее современный «светский» мир (скажу так за неимением более подходящего expression), there is a gap, which is increasingly growing.
\u0026lt;...>
disturbing fact in my division, many Christians are on one side with those who are themselves Christians are not classified. And among non-Christian friends who think I see a lot of that is much closer to the kingdom of heaven than he himself seems. They somehow think that reject the gospel, but actually repels them especially that particular worldview, which really does not deserve confidence.
Moreover, I will cut by half the line of this section, although with time a smaller part of my being left "on the right side" of the border. So, when I listen to the radio or watch on TV debate between a Christian and a humanist, I often find myself on the fact that my sympathies on the side rather humanist. This is not because the range is my belief or devotion to God. I just instinctively share with the inability to adopt the humanist worldview schemes and religious models, in which he is clothed prepodnosimaya faith. I feel that he is right, rebelling against them, and I'm increasingly embarrassed that "orthodoxy" should be identified with them.
