Page 250 [250]
ORSOLYA HORVÁTH
far as human reason proves insufficient in the given situation. In this sense,
this situation is not a hermeneutical one, but is beyond the hermeneutical.
The compelling sign in question does not give certainty in the sense in which
a convincing sign would. However, the compelling sign does give a certainty
in an absolutely different way, which, from a certain perspective, is more
powerful than the certainty of the convincing sign.’ The compelling sign has
its foundation in its testimony for the individual, which reaches its special
certainty by undertaking itself to meet the concrete human — not human
reason — and at the same time taking on the risk of ambiguity hidden in this
meeting.
When we talk about the risk of ambiguity, we have moved on to our second
question mentioned above. What is, then, the real challenge for Abraham,
if not to deermine whether God has spoken or not? While trying to answer
this question, we could also take into consideration Kierkegaard’s concept
of faith. God talks to Abraham and gives him the horrible command:
to sacrifice his son. After Abraham hears the divine order, he takes Isaac and
begins an approximately three-and-a-half-day journey, at the end of which
he raises his hand against his son. In this narrative, the original experience
about the reality of God is followed by a long journey. During this journey,
the original compelling experience lies in the past. Its directness (or indirect
directness?) is further and further away. Meanwhile, the anguish caused
by the content of the divine statement is nearer and nearer. This content
continually tortures Abraham, and throughout the journey, it holds him in the
possibility of offense." As the original God-experience moves away, reason,
From this differentiation, the speciality of so-called “Christian ethics” or “the ethics of faith”
can be seen. (See for example Seung-Goo Lee, The Antithesis between the Religious View
of Ethics and the Rationalistic View of Ethics in Fear and Trembling, in Robert L. Perkins
(ed.), International Kierkegaard Commentary: Fear and Trembling and Repetition, Macon,
Georgia, Mercer University Press, 1993, 101.) Namely, the compelling sign cannot serve as
grounds for any kind of ethics, whereas the convincing sign can; however, the compelling
sign is the only basis for faith itself, which does not have any ethics, but is an “ethics,”
a concrete act, or chain of acts in itself. From the perspective of the compelling sign, it is
clear that there is no such thing as “Christian ethics,” as the Christian faith is an act, i. e.
“ethics” in itself.
10 In Kierkegaard’s Training in Christianity, the theme of offense, which is the most persistent
concept in Kierkegaard’s works (Robert L. Perkins, Introduction, in Robert L. Perkins
(ed.), International Kierkegaard Commentary: Fear and Trembling and Repetition, Macon,
Georgia, Mercer University Press, 1993, 3.), is in focus. The middle piece of the collection
is organised around the topic of offense, between the main themes of invitation (part I.)
and drawing (part III.). (Soren Kierkegaard, Training in Christianity, trans. Walter Lowrie,
Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1944. Part I.: 11—-72.; Part II.: 79-144.; Part III.:
151-254. See also Jesus’ words as central statements in each part: Part I.: “Come hither,
all ye that labour and are heavy laden, I will give you rest” [Matthew 11,28]; Part II.:
“Blessed is he whosoever is not offended in Me” [Matthew 11,6]; Part III.: “And I, if I be
lifted up from the earth, will draw all unto Myself” [John 12,32]). Kierkegaard, or more
precisely Anti-Climacus, claims that the birth of faith has a necessary requirement, namely
+ 248 «
Daréczi-Sepsi-Vassänyi_Initiation_155x240.indb 248 6 2020.06.15. 11:04:22