Page History

Scanned PDF

According to SchleiennacherSchleiermacher, "God" in the properly religious sense of the term means "the whence" of our feeling of absolute dependence and of the absolute dependence of all things. By analogy, then, "Jesus" in the properly Christian sense of the word means "the whence" of our specifically Christian feeling of absolute dependence on God, understood religiously as "the whence" of our feeling of absolute dependence and of the absolute dependence of all things. The relation here can only be an analogy, however, because "the whence" referred to by "God" is transcendental or, more exactly, existential-transcendental, while "the whence" referred to by "Jesus" is historical or, more exactly, _existential-_historical.

This analogy implies, among other things, that, just as all that we can say about God religiously must somehow derive from our simply human feeling of absolute dependence and of the absolute dependence of all things, so all that we can say about Jesus as well as God Christianly must somehow derive from our specifically Christian feeling of him as decisive for our feeling of absolute dependence and of the absolute dependence of all things on God.

The analogy can also be fonnulated formulated by saying that, just as God is first in the orders of being and feeling, although last in the order of knowing for our religious experience simply as human beings, so Jesus is first in the orders of being and feeling, although last in the order of knowing for our specifically Christian religious experience.

...