Tillichova teorija religijskih simbola
Premda je po vlastitom priznanju svoj cjelokupni teološki rad usmjerio prema interpretaciji religijskih simbola kako bi postali razumljivi svim ljudima, Paul Tillich sa svojom teorijom simbola odnosno religijskog jezika izazvao je brojne polemike, stoga ćemo nastojati prikazati njene bitne odrednice...
Published in: | Diacovensia |
---|---|
Main Author: | |
Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
Language: | Croatian |
Published: |
Catholic Faculty of Theology, J. J. Strossmayer University of Osijek
2017
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://hrcak.srce.hr/186523 https://hrcak.srce.hr/file/275103 |
id |
fthrcak:oai:hrcak.srce.hr:186523 |
---|---|
record_format |
openpolar |
institution |
Open Polar |
collection |
Hrčak - Portal of scientific journals of Croatia |
op_collection_id |
fthrcak |
language |
Croatian |
topic |
znak simbol participacija religijski jezik vjera bezuvjetno vrhunsko sveto Bog Krist istina sign symbol participation religious language faith the Unconditional the Ultimate the Holy God Christ truth |
spellingShingle |
znak simbol participacija religijski jezik vjera bezuvjetno vrhunsko sveto Bog Krist istina sign symbol participation religious language faith the Unconditional the Ultimate the Holy God Christ truth Arbanas, Dubravko Tillichova teorija religijskih simbola |
topic_facet |
znak simbol participacija religijski jezik vjera bezuvjetno vrhunsko sveto Bog Krist istina sign symbol participation religious language faith the Unconditional the Ultimate the Holy God Christ truth |
description |
Premda je po vlastitom priznanju svoj cjelokupni teološki rad usmjerio prema interpretaciji religijskih simbola kako bi postali razumljivi svim ljudima, Paul Tillich sa svojom teorijom simbola odnosno religijskog jezika izazvao je brojne polemike, stoga ćemo nastojati prikazati njene bitne odrednice. Uže područje istraživanja nekoliko je njegovih ključnih eseja, a pored toga metoda proučavanja odnosi se i na analizu relevantnih ideja njegovih glavnih kritičara. Kritičkom analizom autor je došao do zaključka da je Tillich prije svega želio prevladati pogubne posljedice ‘doslovnog’ i ‘nadnaravnog’ tumačenja vjerskih učenja, zbog čega je zagovarao filozofiju religije koja bi pomogla osnaživanju značenja simbola i rasvjetljavanju simboličke prirode glavnih vjerskih učenja. Pritom je posebno naglašavao da se simboli nipošto ne smiju poistovjećivati s onim što simboliziraju, kako ne bi došlo do njihova demoniziranja, odnosno do tog da se apsolutiziraju te tako postanu sami sebi svrhom i predmetom idolopokloničkog obožavanja; nego da kao ‘sredstvo’ ukazivanja na Sveto moraju sadržavati i svoju vlastitu negaciju, a što je zapravo afirmacija one stvarnosti koja nam u svojoj biti ostaje do kraja nespoznatljiva. U tom smislu simbol raspetog Krista na križu najviše odgovara sadržaju i značenju vjere, a kao konačni kriterij svih religijskih simbola predstavlja glavnog čuvara protiv njihova demoniziranja. Although Paul Tillich, as he himself confessed, directed his whole theological work towards an interpretation of religious symbols so that all people could understand them, he caused a great deal of polemics with his theory of symbols, or religious language. Therefore, our intention is to show its seminal determinants. The focus of the research is on several of his key essays and the study methodology also includes an analysis of relevant ideas of his most prominent critics. Through critical analysis, the author concluded that Tillich primarily wanted to overcome the devastating consequences of ‘literal’ and ‘supernatural’ interpretation of religious teachings, which is why he advocated a philosophy of religion that would help strengthen the significance of the symbols and shed light on the symbolic nature of the main religious teachings. In doing so, he especially emphasized that the symbols must never be identified with what they symbolize, so they wouldn’t be demonized or turned into the absolutes, and in that way become their own purpose and an object of idolatry. Instead, as an ‘instrument’ of pointing to the Holy, the symbols must also include their own negation, which is in fact the affirmation of the reality that in its essence remains unknowable to us in its entirety. In this sense, the symbol of the Christ crucified on the cross meets the content and meaning of faith to the greatest extent, and as the final criterion of all religious symbols, it represents the main guardian against their demonization. |
format |
Article in Journal/Newspaper |
author |
Arbanas, Dubravko |
author_facet |
Arbanas, Dubravko |
author_sort |
Arbanas, Dubravko |
title |
Tillichova teorija religijskih simbola |
title_short |
Tillichova teorija religijskih simbola |
title_full |
Tillichova teorija religijskih simbola |
title_fullStr |
Tillichova teorija religijskih simbola |
title_full_unstemmed |
Tillichova teorija religijskih simbola |
title_sort |
tillichova teorija religijskih simbola |
publisher |
Catholic Faculty of Theology, J. J. Strossmayer University of Osijek |
publishDate |
2017 |
url |
https://hrcak.srce.hr/186523 https://hrcak.srce.hr/file/275103 |
genre |
sami |
genre_facet |
sami |
op_source |
Diacovensia : teološki prilozi ISSN 1330-2655 (Print) ISSN 1849-014X (Online) Volume 25 Issue 3 |
op_relation |
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.31823/d.25.3.6 https://hrcak.srce.hr/186523 |
op_rights |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess Diacovensia is an Open Access journal. Papers or excerpts of papers published in Diacovensia can be used for all purposes free of charge as long as publisher and author rights are respected and their belonging names credited properly.This regulation is in line with CC BY-NC 4.0 licence (Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial 4.0 International licence) available here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ Journal does not charge article processing charges (APC). Journal does not charge article submission charges. Author(s) hold the copyright and the journal will allow the author(s) to retain publishing rights without restrictions. |
op_rightsnorm |
CC-BY-NC |
op_doi |
https://doi.org/10.31823/d.25.3.6 |
container_title |
Diacovensia |
container_volume |
25 |
container_issue |
3 |
container_start_page |
455 |
op_container_end_page |
473 |
_version_ |
1766186801723080704 |
spelling |
fthrcak:oai:hrcak.srce.hr:186523 2023-05-15T18:14:06+02:00 Tillichova teorija religijskih simbola Tillich’s Theory of Religious Symbols Arbanas, Dubravko 2017-09-18 application/pdf https://hrcak.srce.hr/186523 https://hrcak.srce.hr/file/275103 hrv hrv Catholic Faculty of Theology, J. J. Strossmayer University of Osijek info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.31823/d.25.3.6 https://hrcak.srce.hr/186523 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess Diacovensia is an Open Access journal. Papers or excerpts of papers published in Diacovensia can be used for all purposes free of charge as long as publisher and author rights are respected and their belonging names credited properly.This regulation is in line with CC BY-NC 4.0 licence (Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial 4.0 International licence) available here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ Journal does not charge article processing charges (APC). Journal does not charge article submission charges. Author(s) hold the copyright and the journal will allow the author(s) to retain publishing rights without restrictions. CC-BY-NC Diacovensia : teološki prilozi ISSN 1330-2655 (Print) ISSN 1849-014X (Online) Volume 25 Issue 3 znak simbol participacija religijski jezik vjera bezuvjetno vrhunsko sveto Bog Krist istina sign symbol participation religious language faith the Unconditional the Ultimate the Holy God Christ truth text info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion 2017 fthrcak https://doi.org/10.31823/d.25.3.6 2018-12-13T00:01:44Z Premda je po vlastitom priznanju svoj cjelokupni teološki rad usmjerio prema interpretaciji religijskih simbola kako bi postali razumljivi svim ljudima, Paul Tillich sa svojom teorijom simbola odnosno religijskog jezika izazvao je brojne polemike, stoga ćemo nastojati prikazati njene bitne odrednice. Uže područje istraživanja nekoliko je njegovih ključnih eseja, a pored toga metoda proučavanja odnosi se i na analizu relevantnih ideja njegovih glavnih kritičara. Kritičkom analizom autor je došao do zaključka da je Tillich prije svega želio prevladati pogubne posljedice ‘doslovnog’ i ‘nadnaravnog’ tumačenja vjerskih učenja, zbog čega je zagovarao filozofiju religije koja bi pomogla osnaživanju značenja simbola i rasvjetljavanju simboličke prirode glavnih vjerskih učenja. Pritom je posebno naglašavao da se simboli nipošto ne smiju poistovjećivati s onim što simboliziraju, kako ne bi došlo do njihova demoniziranja, odnosno do tog da se apsolutiziraju te tako postanu sami sebi svrhom i predmetom idolopokloničkog obožavanja; nego da kao ‘sredstvo’ ukazivanja na Sveto moraju sadržavati i svoju vlastitu negaciju, a što je zapravo afirmacija one stvarnosti koja nam u svojoj biti ostaje do kraja nespoznatljiva. U tom smislu simbol raspetog Krista na križu najviše odgovara sadržaju i značenju vjere, a kao konačni kriterij svih religijskih simbola predstavlja glavnog čuvara protiv njihova demoniziranja. Although Paul Tillich, as he himself confessed, directed his whole theological work towards an interpretation of religious symbols so that all people could understand them, he caused a great deal of polemics with his theory of symbols, or religious language. Therefore, our intention is to show its seminal determinants. The focus of the research is on several of his key essays and the study methodology also includes an analysis of relevant ideas of his most prominent critics. Through critical analysis, the author concluded that Tillich primarily wanted to overcome the devastating consequences of ‘literal’ and ‘supernatural’ interpretation of religious teachings, which is why he advocated a philosophy of religion that would help strengthen the significance of the symbols and shed light on the symbolic nature of the main religious teachings. In doing so, he especially emphasized that the symbols must never be identified with what they symbolize, so they wouldn’t be demonized or turned into the absolutes, and in that way become their own purpose and an object of idolatry. Instead, as an ‘instrument’ of pointing to the Holy, the symbols must also include their own negation, which is in fact the affirmation of the reality that in its essence remains unknowable to us in its entirety. In this sense, the symbol of the Christ crucified on the cross meets the content and meaning of faith to the greatest extent, and as the final criterion of all religious symbols, it represents the main guardian against their demonization. Article in Journal/Newspaper sami Hrčak - Portal of scientific journals of Croatia Diacovensia 25 3 455 473 |