Is it possible to be a Christian existentialist?

Question

They're pretty much independant of one another in my mind. Go easy on me because I'm not an expert; but one- it seems to me expounds a belief in a loving God- the other is basically atheistic in outlook. One is concerned with the benefit of the whole in mind, while the other is primarily concerned with the development of the individual. Existentialism seems pretty bleak, hopeless, dreadful and lots of other negative adjectives. Christianity traditionally expounds all the other opposite good stuff (hope, faith joy).

Part 2 of the question is: Tell me about yourself- slappy...
:-)??????

Answer 1

It depends on what you call existentialism. Strictly speaking, as a movement, there are very few pure existentialists. Jean Paul Sartre, Albert Camus, Martin Heidegger, and sort of Simone de Beauvoir.
There have been lots of people who have taken their thinking and run with it, and some of them have even called themselves existentialists, though that is slightly wishful thinking.
Anybody who tells you that Kierkegaard or Nietzsche were existentialists misunderstands the term. They predate existentialism by almost a century, but their thought was extremely important in forming the intellectual basis for the movement.
The most basic definition of what existentialism is pretty much comes down to this; if there is no God, how, then, should we live our lives?
So the whole movement is predicated on the idea that we need to form a moral basis for our existence which does not depend on commandments from God.
Some people find this inspirational. Others find it quite depressing.
But you will notice that the first word in my definition is IF. Not simply "there is no god". The existentialists were all too smart to run around making statements that they could not prove.
They had lived through the horrors of WWII and were shocked and traumatized by what it did to Europe and the rest of the world, and they came to the very natural conclusion that perhaps God wasn't going to be around to step in and save us from the worst horrors imagineable. So their need was to try and create a moral and social structure that was not dependent on religion, which had failed to stop the war, and which was pretty clearly corrupt in most other ways, too.

What it comes down to is that existentialism does not inherently depend on denying the existence of God; it's atheism that does that. But it does attempt to deal with the fact that in many ways God and his purposes and powers are not going to solve all our problems for us.
So it does not contradict the existence of God, but the question of God then becomes somewhat unimportant to existential philosophy. You could be both at the same time, but philisophically speaking you would have to do a little fancy dancing to justify why you want both.

Answer 2

Hello, does Soren Kierkegaard ring a bell? He is one of the founders of existentialism and was a devote Christian. Read "Fear and Trembling" for a good but fairly short introduction to his interpretation for the Abraham and Isaac situation. He rocks! Also, "I / Thou" by Martin Buber rocks hard, he is a devote Jewish existentialist.

As a clarification, existentialism is more of a system based on personal experience and subjectivity, thus Kierkegaard talks about how a direct, personal command from God would trump all other cultural and "religious" morality. That is why is was morally right for Abraham to offer Isaac as a sacrafice, which would have been seen as murder by any other rational person outside of the event.

Answer 3

I think you answered your own question. If you're a Christian and an existentialist, then it's pretty much just an empty label. As in, culturally speaking, you define yourself as a Christian, but don't actually believe any of it's major tenants.

Answer 4

the actuality which you 2 have made it this some distance contained in the courting -- previous the complicated morals, limits, and elevating young infants conversations -- is a testomony on your ability to make this artwork. i became raised Catholic and fell in love with an atheist. We had those conversations, yet they constantly ended up unresolved. He puzzled my ethical judgements, thinking why somebody would do something (or no longer do something) by way of fact "God advised you to." He hated the belief of me taking our hypothetical infants to church till i became prepared to the two demonstrate them to a pair different faith, atheism, etc. (is that even achieveable?). contained in the top, i found out that, even although we've been involved in one yet another bodily and emotionally, this became no longer one among those affection that ought to final. there'll constantly be some variety or disagreements in a courting. as long as you appreciate one yet another's ideals and are open to discussing them with one yet another (and open to questions from the infants), it seems such as you 2 could have an enduring courting. sturdy success!

Answer 5

Kirkegaard is the obvious answer. Dostoevsky was a Christian and who influenced Existentialism a great deal.

Answer 6

Kierkegaard

Answer 7

I think Jim's right -- You kinda answered your own question:

Existentialist: Bleak, hopeless atheist.
Christian: Joyful, hopeful God-lover.

The two are mutually exclusive.

Barjesse37

Answer 8

Yes. Since these are just labels that you put on yourself, you can
remove these labels and be just pretty much yourself.

Answer 9

I thought about that before. I don't think so, it kind of defeats the purpose of faith.

Answer 10

I am a positive and optimistic existentialist... what you describe sounds more like nihlism....