https://tidsskrift.dk/dtt <p><span class="First">D</span>anmarks førende fagteologiske tidsskrift. Udgives af Forlaget eksistensen i samarbejde med Det Teologiske Fakultet i København og Afdeling for Teologi på Aarhus Universitet.</p> <p>Tidsskriftet modtog til og med årgang 2021 støtte fra Det Frie Forskningsråd.</p> <p>Årgang 2023 støttes af FOF og Tænketanken Prospekt.</p> <p> </p> Eksistensen Akademisk da-DK Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 0105-3191 https://tidsskrift.dk/dtt/article/view/150699 Johanne Stubbe Teglbjærg Kristensen Copyright (c) 2024 Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 2024-11-05 2024-11-05 87 3 10.7146/dtt.v87i3.150699 https://tidsskrift.dk/dtt/article/view/150709 Johanne Stubbe Teglbjærg Kristensen Copyright (c) 2024 Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 2024-11-05 2024-11-05 87 3 159 160 10.7146/dtt.v87i3.150709 https://tidsskrift.dk/dtt/article/view/150710 <p>This article discusses the doctrine of ‘hereditary sin’ as the theological context of baptism in article 2 of the Lutheran <em>Confessio Augustana</em> (1530). Since the Danish constitution supports the “Evangelical-Lutheran church”, the theological, judicial and political interpretation of this article is an issue of controversy. Niklas Luhmann’s theory of functional differentiation of social systems offers a clue for a clarification. On Luhmann’s account, the dogma of hereditary sin, which was formulated by Augustine in the early Latin church, is a deliberate uncoupling of religion from the family: The forefathers are no longer the object of worship, since they like all men are sinners to be prayed <em>for</em>, rather than prayed <em>to</em>. In a contemporary perspective, the doctrine of hereditary sin offers an unprecedented “schematism of self-observation” which Paul Ricœur’s hermeneutics of religious symbols qualifies. These hermeneutical and sociological perspectives should be taken into consideration in the debate over the Lutheran heritage in the Danish religious and political context.</p> Carsten Pallesen Copyright (c) 2024 Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 2024-11-05 2024-11-05 87 3 161 187 https://tidsskrift.dk/dtt/article/view/150714 <p>This article engages with the problem of human suffering from the philosophy of religion perspective through a presentation of Slavoj Žižek’s exposition of a number of theological key themes related to this problem. The focal point is Žižek’s claim that the crucial aspect of human suffering has to do with our attempts to ascribe a higher meaning to it. The first section of the article introduces the problem of suffering and its theological stakes through a reading of Freud and Nietzsche, who constitute an essential part of Žižek’s context. The next two sections account for Žižek’s interpretations of the Book of Job, focusing on his notion of Job as a critic of theodicy-arguments and as an anticipator of Christ. The fourth part of the article reads Žižek’s interpretation of Christ’s suffering on the cross as a critical engagement with the classical doctrines of reconciliation. The article ends with some concluding remarks.</p> Mads Peter Karlsen Copyright (c) 2024 Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 2024-11-05 2024-11-05 87 3 188 216 10.7146/dtt.v87i3.150714 https://tidsskrift.dk/dtt/article/view/150716 <p>This article seeks to explore the concept of love in Romans in order to examine whether Kierkegaard operates with a similar concept in his <em>Works of Love. </em>It argues, first, that Paul creates an understanding of agapeic love centred around Rom 10,4 and Rom 13,8-10. A chiastic development of the concept of love sees the love of God being the end(goal) of the law which allows the love of humans to fulfil the law. The second part of the article outlines the Pauline traits in Kierke­gaard’s concept of love in <em>Works of Love</em>. Here it is shown how Kierke­gaard appropriates Paul’s chiastic approach to love as well as the understanding of love as sustaining a Christian identity of minority. Finally, the article acknowledges the differences between Paul, the apostle, and Kierkegaard, the genius, while also accentuating the similarities in their radical proposals of Christian love.</p> Anders Haagerup Copyright (c) 2024 Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 2024-11-05 2024-11-05 87 3 217 232 https://tidsskrift.dk/dtt/article/view/150731 Martin Schwarz Lausten Copyright (c) 2024 Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 2024-11-05 2024-11-05 87 3 233 234 10.7146/dtt.v87i3.150731 https://tidsskrift.dk/dtt/article/view/150734 Kurt E. Larsen Copyright (c) 2024 Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 2024-11-05 2024-11-05 87 3 235 236 10.7146/dtt.v87i3.150734 https://tidsskrift.dk/dtt/article/view/150737 Rosanne Liebermann Copyright (c) 2024 Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 2024-11-05 2024-11-05 87 3 237 238 10.7146/dtt.v87i3.150737 https://tidsskrift.dk/dtt/article/view/150738 Martin Ravn Copyright (c) 2024 Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 2024-11-05 2024-11-05 87 3 239 241 10.7146/dtt.v87i3.150738 https://tidsskrift.dk/dtt/article/view/150739 Frederik Poulsen Copyright (c) 2024 Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 2024-11-05 2024-11-05 87 3 242 243 10.7146/dtt.v87i3.150739 https://tidsskrift.dk/dtt/article/view/150740 Martin Schwarz Lausten Copyright (c) 2024 Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 2024-11-05 2024-11-05 87 3 244 245 10.7146/dtt.v87i3.150740 https://tidsskrift.dk/dtt/article/view/150741 Eberhard Harbsmeier Copyright (c) 2024 Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 2024-11-05 2024-11-05 87 3 246 248 10.7146/dtt.v87i3.150741 https://tidsskrift.dk/dtt/article/view/150742 Lone Kølle Martinsen Copyright (c) 2024 Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 2024-11-05 2024-11-05 87 3 249 250 10.7146/dtt.v87i3.150742