Mito y logos se unen en la descripción del mito que admite una representación (Vergegenwärtigung) y es comprensible para el entendimiento: “μυθολογεῖν”. De este modo, aquel logos que era en el principio” es él mismo un mito, si no se hiciera presente (vergegenwärtigt) a sí mismo como logos. El principio de la religión, el Eterno mismo, deja narrar en el judaísmo un mito que culmina en un logos y puede ser interpretado como tal. En el cristianismo, la auto-re-presentación del principio de la religión como autorreflexión, esto es, la encarnación, pone al logos antes que al mito: El que me ve a mí, ve al Padre” (Jn. 14, 9). Esto es lo que distingue al cristianismo de aquello que ha de permanecer ajeno al judaísmo, pues: "No puedes ver mi rostro y seguir viviendo” (Ex. 33, 11ss).

Mito y logos se unen en la descripción del mito que admite una representación (Vergegenwärtigung) y es comprensible para el entendimiento: “muqologei=n”. De este modo, aquel logos que era “en el principio” es él mismo un mito, si no se hiciera presente (vergegenwärtigt) a sí mismo como logos. El principio de la religión, el Eterno mismo, deja narrar en el judaísmo un mito que culmina en un logos y puede ser interpretado como tal. En el cristianismo, la auto-re-presentación del principio de la religión como autorreflexión, esto es, la encarnación, pone al logos antes que al mito: “El que me ve a mí, ve al Padre” (Jn. 14, 9). Esto es lo que distingue al cristianismo de aquello que ha de permanecer ajeno al judaísmo, pues: “No puedes ver mi rostro y seguir viviendo” (Ex. 33, 11ss). --- “‘In the beginning was the logos’ –or was it rather the mythos? On t...

The great monotheistic religions –Judaism, Christianity, and Islam– agree in announcing God’s love for men, while demanding men’s love for God and for their neighbors. However, a brief look at these religions’ praxis leads to doubt whether this love is not a mere statement, while in history and at present were and are still imposed exclusive truth claims exercising violence against the adepts of the own religion (“internally”) and, in especial, against the followers of other religions (“externally”) in order to attain political power. Now, a distinction between the just sovereign power of God and detrimental violence should be made, asides from the fact that God’s sovereign power and God’s concept is not the same in the three great monotheistic religions. In Judaism God governs with love and as king, in Christianity with love and as servant, in Islam with love and m...

Currently, the great monotheistic religions –Judaism, Christianity and Islam– may seem anachronic. Judging from their principles and rituals, they appear to belong to the Middle Ages. This seems to be confirmed by a brief consideration of the history of Western science, certainly marked by first philosophy, and by its division into its three periods: ancient, medieval and modern. The One, recognized by Plotinus as the necessary condition of all multiplicity, and which religions identify with God, may be considered the principle of medieval thought. Alongside Descartes, modernity replaced this principle, and by the end of this period Nietzsche claimed that “God is dead! God remains dead! We have killed him!” But, is God dead? If the Modern Age, which started with Nietzsche, has killed God, does it mean that monotheistic religions have also been deprived of life and vitality? Or do...

The great monotheistic religions -Judaism, Christianity, and Islam- agree in announcing God’s love for men, while demanding men’s love for God and for their neighbors. However, a brief look at these religions’ praxis leads to doubt whether this love is not a mere statement, while in history and at present were and are still imposed exclusive truth claims exercising violence against the adepts of the own religion ("internally”) and, in especial, against the followers of other religions ("externally”) in order to attain political power. Now, a distinction between the just sovereign power of God and detrimental violence should be made, asides from the fact that God’s sovereign power and God’s concept is not the same in the three great monotheistic religions. In Judaism God governs with love and as king, in Christianity with love and as servant, in Islam with love and majesty. ...

En la época moderna, las grandes religiones monoteístas –judaísmo, cristianismo e islam– pueden dar la impresión de ser anacrónicas, pues por sus principios y sus rituales parecen pertenecer al medioevo. Una breve consideración de la historia de la ciencia occidental, ciertamente marcada por la filosofía  primera y efectuada la división en sus tres épocas –antigua, medieval y moderna–, parece confirmarlo. Como principio del pensamiento medieval puede considerarse al Uno,  reconocido por Plotino como condición necesaria de toda multiplicidad y que en las religiones es identificado con Dios. Con Descartes, la época moderna sustituye este principio, y al final de esta época Nietzsche afirma que ¡Dios ha muerto! ¡Dios permanece muerto! ¡Nosotros lo hemos matado!” Pero, ¿ha muerto Dios? Si la época moderna, si la Modernidad iniciada con Nietzsche ha matado a Dios,...

Páginas 109-118

Mito y logos se unen en la descripción del mito que admite una representación (Vergegenwärtigung) y es comprensible para el entendimiento: “muqologei=n”. De este modo, aquel logos que era “en el principio” es él mismo un mito, si no se hiciera presente (vergegenwärtigt) a sí mismo como logos. El principio de la religión, el Eterno mismo, deja narrar en el judaísmo un mito que culmina en un logos y puede ser interpretado como tal. En el cristianismo, la auto-re-presentación del principio de la religión como autorreflexión, esto es, la encarnación, pone al logos antes que al mito: “El que me ve a mí, ve al Padre” (Jn. 14, 9). Esto es lo que distingue al cristianismo de aquello que ha de permanecer ajeno al judaísmo, pues: “No puedes ver mi rostro y seguir viviendo” (Ex. 33, 11ss). --- “‘In the beginning was the logos’ –or was it rather the mythos? On t...

The great monotheistic religions –Judaism, Christianity, and Islam– agree in announcing God’s love for men, while demanding men’s love for God and for their neighbors. However, a brief look at these religions’ praxis leads to doubt whether this love is not a mere statement, while in history and at present were and are still imposed exclusive truth claims exercising violence against the adepts of the own religion (“internally”) and, in especial, against the followers of other religions (“externally”) in order to attain political power. Now, a distinction between the just sovereign power of God and detrimental violence should be made, asides from the fact that God’s sovereign power and God’s concept is not the same in the three great monotheistic religions. In Judaism God governs with love and as king, in Christianity with love and as servant, in Islam with love and m...

Currently, the great monotheistic religions –Judaism, Christianity and Islam– may seem anachronic. Judging from their principles and rituals, they appear to belong to the Middle Ages. This seems to be confirmed by a brief consideration of the history of Western science, certainly marked by first philosophy, and by its division into its three periods: ancient, medieval and modern. The One, recognized by Plotinus as the necessary condition of all multiplicity, and which religions identify with God, may be considered the principle of medieval thought. Alongside Descartes, modernity replaced this principle, and by the end of this period Nietzsche claimed that “God is dead! God remains dead! We have killed him!” But, is God dead? If the Modern Age, which started with Nietzsche, has killed God, does it mean that monotheistic religions have also been deprived of life and vitality? Or do...