• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.145
• /
• pp.217-244
• /
• 2018

This paper reviews how $J{\ddot{u}}rgen$ Moltmann embraces and transforms the philosophy of Ernst Bloch. For what are the hopes of the two thinkers who presuppose opposing worldviews? This question will provide a good opportunity to look at how different religious types, based on different worldviews in modern philosophy of religion, can understand and communicate with one another. Ernst Bloch was a philosopher who originally interpreted Judeo-Christian thought through Marxism and Persian Dualism and helped to carry out the intrinsic criticism of the doctrine of Christian eschatology by developing atheism of Christianity into a philosophy of hope. Bloch and Moltmann deal with the concepts of future, humanity, nation, and hope in the eschatological horizon, but their worldviews are so different. For example, the connection between the Beginning and Ending, Disjunction or Continuation, the Core of Existence and Resurrection, Messianism and Marxism, Atheism and Theism, Persian Dualism and Judeo-Christian Monotheism. Therefore, a one-sided interpretation that ignores worldview differences in the hopes of these two thinkers should be avoided. Moltmann actively embraced the Messianism of the Jewish thinker, Bloch, by excluding Marxism, made the spectrum of broad-minded horizons diminished in the union of Messianism and Marxism. Moltmann replaced the utopian possibilities of matter in the Ontology of Not-Yet-Being, with the resurrection of Christ, who was crucified, and with the God of Creation and the God of Exodus. By overthrowing the position of atheism in Christianity, which was very important for Bloch, with the system of Trinitarian Monotheism, it resulted in the disconnection and conflict between the Old Testament and the New Testament, especially the ignorance of the tension between God the Lord and Jesus Christ.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.53
• /
• pp.165-190
• /
• 2017

This thesis is for the analysis of the relationships between Mozi's 'Heaven and Man' through the inspection of meaning and emphasis in his three books, 'Heaven's Will', 'Verification of Ghost' and 'Indeterminism'. According to the previous study, the Heaven's Will and Verification of Ghost are justify Mozi's theory of theistic stance with the Heaven's authority. And in case of the 'Indeterminism', there seems to be positive and rational way of awareness and it's thought to be atheistic stance. It is thought that there is a rule of action which is about the personality principle, and it suggest that how the government rule the country, and how the people lead a life. And it is the ghost that give prize or punishment when they did something according to this principle or not. So, men should do their best in actual life to meet the heaven's will. Because my fate is not decided by heaven's order but my own action. And it is thought that the main point of 'the indeterminism' is about Heaven helps those who do independent and active efforts. In short, 'the Heaven's Will', Verification of Ghost' and 'Indeterminism' are neither contradiction nor conversion form theism to atheism. Mozi is thought to divide clearly about ghost's works and people's works, and it is expressed explicitly in his works 'Heaven's Will', 'Verification of Ghost' and 'Indeterminism'.