Comments on: The Impossible Kingdom http://theimageoffish.com/2010/07/15/the-impossible-kingdom/ we swim in interpretation Mon, 07 May 2012 17:18:33 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Ricoeur and the exigency of language at (Ir)religiosity http://theimageoffish.com/2010/07/15/the-impossible-kingdom/comment-page-1/#comment-215 Ricoeur and the exigency of language at (Ir)religiosity Tue, 20 Jul 2010 16:36:22 +0000 http://theimageoffish.com/?p=214#comment-215 [...] to a new post at The Image of Fish and Tripp Fuller’s suggestion of throwing in some Eberhard Jüngel with my Deleuze, I have [...] [...] to a new post at The Image of Fish and Tripp Fuller’s suggestion of throwing in some Eberhard Jüngel with my Deleuze, I have [...]

]]> By: Blake Huggins http://theimageoffish.com/2010/07/15/the-impossible-kingdom/comment-page-1/#comment-209 Blake Huggins Thu, 15 Jul 2010 13:33:59 +0000 http://theimageoffish.com/?p=214#comment-209 This is a great counterweight to what I'm trying to get at (and iterates some points commenters have pressed me on).  It seems to me that there are two pieces you are describing here that have to be present in order for the poetics of the impossible to work for Christian theology: the political (the actively being in the present part) and the Christological.   LIke you, I am very indebted to Caputo's work here but I think Christology may be one of the weakest points of his weak theology.  He has a fairly strong theology of the Cross as a display of God's weakness but I'm not sure if he adequately addresses the significance of the Christ Event like you are suggesting.  Using the messianic trope from Derrida and Blanchot he wants to say that the coming of the messiah is always predicated upon the messiahs return or coming again (the "to-come").  I like that but I wonder if it still neglects or even trivializes the singularity of the Christ Event.  Too bad that interview is over, this would have been an excellent question to ask!  So how can we have a theology of the event which is radically eschatological and still recognizes the singularity and importance of the Christ Event?  I don't think I have come across anyone who is addressing the question that way, at least not someone who also takes continental philosophy into account. I wonder if a pneumatologically (it is interesting to me that Spirit is also noticeably absent in Caputo) situated Christology might help us? This is a great counterweight to what I'm trying to get at (and iterates some points commenters have pressed me on).  It seems to me that there are two pieces you are describing here that have to be present in order for the poetics of the impossible to work for Christian theology: the political (the actively being in the present part) and the Christological.  

LIke you, I am very indebted to Caputo's work here but I think Christology may be one of the weakest points of his weak theology.  He has a fairly strong theology of the Cross as a display of God's weakness but I'm not sure if he adequately addresses the significance of the Christ Event like you are suggesting.  Using the messianic trope from Derrida and Blanchot he wants to say that the coming of the messiah is always predicated upon the messiahs return or coming again (the "to-come").  I like that but I wonder if it still neglects or even trivializes the singularity of the Christ Event.  Too bad that interview is over, this would have been an excellent question to ask! 

So how can we have a theology of the event which is radically eschatological and still recognizes the singularity and importance of the Christ Event?  I don't think I have come across anyone who is addressing the question that way, at least not someone who also takes continental philosophy into account.

I wonder if a pneumatologically (it is interesting to me that Spirit is also noticeably absent in Caputo) situated Christology might help us?

]]>