Abstract

S podobo svetovnega in človekovega razvoja, katerega vzrok, obenem pa učinek je njegovo boštveno – ne pa tudi božansko – Počelo, Jonas seveda prelamlja s temeljnima zapovedma svojih učiteljev Heideggra in Bultmanna, filozofa in teologa. Krši Heideggrovo zahtevo o deteologizaciji filozofije in Bultmanno zahtevo o demitologizaciji teologije. S tem pa zapušča tudi fenomenološko oz. hermenevtično izhodišče, na katerega ga opozarja Bultmann. Ne začenja od sebe, ne izhaja iz lastne eksistence, iz svoje smrtne biti, marveč iz Boga in njegove nesmrtnosti. Kako je takšna remitologizacija in reteologizacija po Nietzschejevi razglasitvi smrti Boga sploh še možna?With his image of the worldly and human development, whose cause as well as effect is its godly – and not divine – Origin, Jonas of course breaks with his two fundamental commandments of his teachers Heidegger and Bultmann, philosopher and theologian. He violates Heidegger’s demand for the detheologization of philosophy and Bultmann’s demand for the demythologization of theology. With this, he also leaves behind the phenomenological or hermeneutic starting point, of which he is warned by Bultmann. He doesn’t start from himself, he doesn’t proceed from his own existence, from his mortal being, but rather from God and his immortality. How is such remythologization and retheologization still possible after Nietzsche’s proclamation of the death of God?